Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset. Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from nine centers and six different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. A panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (κ) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification. Results: While the agreement of individual radiologists with the PMR ranged from κ = 0.483 to κ = 0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92 %). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (κ = 0.620, standard deviation [SD] = 0.140), individual versus PMR (κ = 0.736, SD = 0.117), and individual versus ABDE (κ = 0.674, SD = 0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (κ = 0.831). Conclusions: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation. Key Points: • Individual BD assessment differs from PMR with κ as low as 0.483.• An ABDE correctly classified 92 % of mammograms with almost perfect agreement (κ = 0.831).• An ABDE can be a valid alternative to subjective BD assessment.
Mammographic density : comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset / D. Sacchetto, L. Morra, S. Agliozzo, D. Bernardi, T. Björklund, B. Brancato, P. Bravetti, L.A. Carbonaro, L. Correale, C. Fantò, E. Favettini, L. Martincich, L. Milanesio, S. Mombelloni, F. Monetti, D. Morrone, M. Pellegrini, B. Pesce, A. Petrillo, G. Saguatti, C. Stevanin, R.M. Trimboli, P. Tuttobene, M. Valentini, V. Marra, A. Frigerio, A. Bert, F. Sardanelli. - In: EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY. - ISSN 0938-7994. - 26:1(2016 Jan 01), pp. 175-183. [10.1007/s00330-015-3784-2]
Mammographic density : comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset
L.A. Carbonaro;R.M. Trimboli;F. Sardanelli
2016
Abstract
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset. Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from nine centers and six different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. A panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (κ) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification. Results: While the agreement of individual radiologists with the PMR ranged from κ = 0.483 to κ = 0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92 %). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (κ = 0.620, standard deviation [SD] = 0.140), individual versus PMR (κ = 0.736, SD = 0.117), and individual versus ABDE (κ = 0.674, SD = 0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (κ = 0.831). Conclusions: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation. Key Points: • Individual BD assessment differs from PMR with κ as low as 0.483.• An ABDE correctly classified 92 % of mammograms with almost perfect agreement (κ = 0.831).• An ABDE can be a valid alternative to subjective BD assessment.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
art%3A10.1007%2Fs00330-015-3784-2.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
539.57 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
539.57 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
|
art_10.1007_s00330-015-3784-2.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
512.1 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
512.1 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.




