Determining sensitivity of mammography from screening data, cancer incidence, and receiver-operating characteristic curve parameters

被引:6
作者
Boone, JM [1 ]
Lindfors, KK [1 ]
Seibert, JA [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Davis, Med Ctr, Res Imaging Ctr, Dept Radiol, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
关键词
breast cancer; mammography; positive predictive value; sensitivity; specificity; receiver-operating characteristic curves; cancer detection rates; screening;
D O I
10.1177/02789X02022003005
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives. A mathematical model is presented that allows the computation of the sensitivity and specificity of breast screening based on receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve shape, the positive predictive value (PPV) of screening mammography, and the cancer incidence, f. Methods. The normal and cancer populations are modeled as normal distributions with independent means and standard deviations. The distributions are scaled such that the area of the normal population is equal to 1 - f and that of the cancer population is f. The PPV for screening mammography is used to deters mine the operating point on the HOC curve. Knowing this leads directly to the computation of sensitivity and specificity. The derivation is general and is applicable to both symmetrical and asymmetrical ROC curves. Results. For symmetric ROC curves and typical values for the PPV of mammography (about 8%) and cancer incidence (f = 0,003), an A(z) value of 0.95 was required to achieve 63% sensitivity and an A(z) value of 0.98 led to 86% sensitivity. Conclusion. A model was developed that should allow researchers to deduce sensitivity and specificity for screening mammography based on ROC curve measurements and using realistic values of PPV and f. This model allows A(z) values to be related to the probability of breast cancer detection.
引用
收藏
页码:228 / 237
页数:10
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
Abramowitz M., 1970, HDB MATH FUNCTIONS
[2]   DIAGNOSTIC OUTCOME OF REPEATED MAMMOGRAPHY SCREENING [J].
ARNESSON, LG ;
VITAK, B ;
MANSON, JC ;
FAGERBERG, G ;
SMEDS, S .
WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1995, 19 (03) :372-378
[3]   Metabolic characterization of breast tumors with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose [J].
Avril, N ;
Dose, J ;
Janicke, F ;
Bense, S ;
Ziegler, S ;
Laubenbacher, C ;
Romer, W ;
Pache, H ;
Herz, M ;
Allgayer, B ;
Nathrath, W ;
Graeff, H ;
Schwaiger, M .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1996, 14 (06) :1848-1857
[4]   Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists - Findings from a national sample [J].
Beam, CA ;
Layde, PM ;
Sullivan, DC .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1996, 156 (02) :209-213
[5]  
BOONE JM, 1999, MED PHYS, V26, P1065
[6]  
Ciatto S, 1995, J Med Screen, V2, P99
[7]   The sensitivity of medicare claims data for case ascertainment of six common cancers [J].
Cooper, GS ;
Yuan, Z ;
Stange, KC ;
Dennis, LK ;
Amini, SB ;
Rimm, AA .
MEDICAL CARE, 1999, 37 (05) :436-444
[8]  
Davis P L, 1997, Eur Radiol, V7 Suppl 5, P289
[9]   Medical audit of diagnostic mammography examinations: Comparison with screening outcomes obtained concurrently [J].
Dee, KE ;
Sickles, EA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2001, 176 (03) :729-733
[10]   DEGENERACY AND DISCRETE RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC RATING DATA [J].
DORFMAN, DD ;
BERBAUM, KS .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 1995, 2 (10) :907-915