A Logistic Regression Model Based on the National Mammography Database Format to Aid Breast Cancer Diagnosis

被引:58
作者
Chhatwal, Jagpreet [1 ,2 ]
Alagoz, Oguzhan [2 ]
Lindstrom, Mary J. [3 ]
Kahn, Charles E., Jr. [4 ]
Shaffer, Katherine A. [4 ]
Burnside, Elizabeth S. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Dept Radiol, Clin Sci Ctr E3 311, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[3] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Biostat & Med Informat, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[4] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Radiol, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
关键词
logistic regression; mammography; National Mammography Database; risk prediction; POSITIVE PREDICTIVE-VALUE; SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY; BAYESIAN NETWORK; DATA SYSTEM; RISK; ACCURACY; MICROCALCIFICATIONS; VARIABILITY; PERFORMANCE; RADIOLOGY;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.07.3345
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to create a breast cancer risk estimation model based on the descriptors of the National Mammography Database using logistic regression that can aid in decision making for the early detection of breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We created two logistic regression models based on the mammography features and demographic data for 62,219 consecutive mammography records from 48,744 studies in 18,270 patients reported using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon and the National Mammography Database format between April 5, 1999 and February 9, 2004. State cancer registry outcomes matched with our data served as the reference standard. The probability of cancer was the outcome in both models. Model 2 was built using all variables in Model 1 plus radiologists' BI-RADS assessment categories. We used 10-fold cross-validation to train and test the model and to calculate the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (A(z)) to measure the performance. Both models were compared with the radiologists' BI-RADS assessments. RESULTS. Radiologists achieved an A(z) value of 0.939 +/- 0.011. The A(z) was 0.927 +/- 0.015 for Model 1 and 0.963 +/- 0.009 for Model 2. At 90% specificity, the sensitivity of Model 2 (90%) was significantly better (p < 0.001) than that of radiologists (82%) and Model 1 (83%). At 85% sensitivity, the specificity of Model 2 (96%) was significantly better (p < 0.001) than that of radiologists (88%) and Model 1 (87%). CONCLUSION. Our logistic regression model can effectively discriminate between benign and malignant breast disease and can identify the most important features associated with breast cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:1117 / 1127
页数:11
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]  
*AM COLL RAD, 2004, BREAST IM REP DAT SY
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Applied logistic regression
[3]  
[Anonymous], BREAST IM REP DAT SY
[4]   Logistic regression in the medical literature: Standards for use and reporting, with particular attention to one medical domain [J].
Bagley, SC ;
White, H ;
Golomb, BA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 54 (10) :979-985
[5]   BREAST-CANCER - PREDICTION WITH ARTIFICIAL NEURAL-NETWORK-BASED ON BI-RADS STANDARDIZED LEXICON [J].
BAKER, JA ;
KORNGUTH, PJ ;
LO, JY ;
WILLIFORD, ME ;
FLOYD, CE .
RADIOLOGY, 1995, 196 (03) :817-822
[6]   Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists [J].
Barlow, WE ;
Chi, C ;
Carney, PA ;
Taplin, SH ;
D'Orsi, C ;
Cutter, G ;
Hendrick, RE ;
Elmore, JG .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2004, 96 (24) :1840-1850
[7]   Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography [J].
Barlow, William E. ;
White, Emily ;
Ballard-Barbash, Rachel ;
Vacek, Pamela M. ;
Titus-Ernstoff, Linda ;
Carney, Patricia A. ;
Tice, Jeffrey A. ;
Buist, Diana S. M. ;
Geller, Berta M. ;
Rosenberg, Robert ;
Yankaskas, Bonnie C. ;
Kerlikowske, Karla .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2006, 98 (17) :1204-1214
[8]  
BASSETT LW, 1994, 13 US DEP HLTH HUM S
[9]   Does training in the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? [J].
Berg, WA ;
D'Orsi, CJ ;
Jackson, VP ;
Bassett, LW ;
Beam, CA ;
Lewis, RS ;
Crewson, PE .
RADIOLOGY, 2002, 224 (03) :871-880
[10]   Development and evaluation of a case-based reasoning classifier for prediction of breast biopsy outcome with BI-RADS™ lexicon [J].
Bilska-Wolak, AO ;
Floyd, CE .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2002, 29 (09) :2090-2100