AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Floyd, C. E.
Right arrow Articles by Tourassi, G. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Floyd, C. E., Jr.
Right arrow Articles by Tourassi, G. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Case-Based Reasoning Computer Algorithm that Uses Mammographic Findings for Breast Biopsy Decisions

Carey E. Floyd, Jr.1,2, Joseph Y. Lo1,2 and Georgia D. Tourassi1

1 Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 2623, Durham, NC 27710.
2 Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.



View larger version (47K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. —Histogram shows benign and malignant cases binned by malignancy fraction output of case-based reasoning system. Note that although benign and malignant cases overlap considerably, 81 cases with malignancy fraction of less than 0.1 are all benign. These patients could be spared surgery without missing any malignancies. Dark shading indicates malignant; light shading indicates benign.

 


View larger version (43K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. —Histogram of benign and malignant cases binned by malignancy fraction expanded around high-sensitivity region binned by malignancy fraction. Note that if threshold were set at 0.15, additional 40 benign cases would not have been biopsied, and one malignancy would have been missed. Dark shading indicates malignant; light shading indicates benign.

 


View larger version (89K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. —Mammogram of 73-year-old woman with cluster of microcalcifications (>10) described as fine-branching. Cluster is at tip of white arrowhead. Both mammographer and case-based reasoning would correctly recommend biopsy of this malignant lesion.

 


View larger version (68K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. —Mammogram of 43-year-old woman with isodense lobulated 18-mm mass with well-circumscribed margin. Mass is at tip of white arrowhead. Both mammographer and case-based reasoning would correctly recommend no biopsy of this benign lesion.

 


View larger version (134K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. —Mammogram of 45-year-old woman with isodense irregular 25-mm mass with obscured margin. Mass is at tip of white arrowhead. Mammographer correctly recommended biopsy of this malignant lesion. Case-based reasoning would miss this malignancy if threshold were increased to avoid 40 more biopsies.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.