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 Lo, J. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Floyd, C. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lo, J. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Floyd, C. E., Jr.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

Cross-Institutional Evaluation of BI-RADS Predictive Model for Mammographic Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Joseph Y. Lo1,2, Mia K. Markey1,2, Jay A. Baker1 and Carey E. Floyd, Jr.1,2

1 Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, DUMC-3302, Bryan Research Bldg., Rm. 161G, Durham, NC 27710.
2 Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC 27710.



View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Graph shows receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for three trials, which differ according to whether each was trained or tested on Duke or Penn data sets. Partial ROC plot corresponding to top 10% of this plot is shown in Figure 2. Top line=trial A (Duke/Duke), middle line=trial C (Penn/Penn), bottom line=trial B (Duke/Penn).

 


View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Graph shows partial receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (sensitivity >= 90%) for three trials. Letters A, B, and C in this plot mark actual operating points used for those trials. Trial A (Duke/Duke) was best performer, followed by closely intertwined curves for trials C (Penn/Penn) and B (Duke/Penn).

 


View larger version (19K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Partial histogram of model outputs for Duke-only trial A. This model was trained and tested on Duke set. This histogram spans only output range 0-0.284, corresponding to 90% sensitivity or better. Threshold of 0.10 yields 98% sensitivity and 36% specificity as reported in Table 2. White bar = benign, black bar = malignant.

 


View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Partial histogram of model outputs for cross-institutional trial B. This model was trained on the Duke set and tested using the Penn set. Histogram spans only output range 0-0.176, corresponding to 90% sensitivity or better. Applying trial A's threshold of 0.10 resulted in 96% sensitivity and 28% specificity. White bar = benign, black bar = malignant.

 

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 © 2002 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.