BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
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 Brown, M
Right arrow Articles by Wallis, M G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brown, M
Right arrow Articles by Wallis, M G
British Journal of Radiology 74 (2001),317-322 © 2001 The British Institute of Radiology

Full paper

Geographical distribution of breast cancers on the mammogram: an interval cancer database

M Brown C Eccles, MSc and M G Wallis, FRCR

Warwickshire, Solihull and Coventry Breast Screening Service, Coventry and Warwickshire Hospital, Stoney Stanton Road, Coventry CV1 4FH, UK

Correspondence: Dr MG Wallis

Auditing interval cancers is an important part of a breast screening radiologist's continuing education. We set out to determine whether the position of interval cancers on the mammogram differs from those detected at screening. The 773 interval cancers so far identified, and the first 200 screen detected cancers, have been entered onto a Microsoft Access 97 database developed to record pathological and radiological features, including the position of the cancer on a stylized diagram using a "point and click" system. Reports were generated showing positions of all interval cancers by classification and reader. The distribution of true interval cancers is statistically different from screen detected cancers on both views. The distribution of the false negative and screen detected cancers only differs on the oblique view. False negative and true interval cancers are of the same distribution on both craniocaudal and oblique views. However, these differences do not appear to be practically useful when applied to individual readers. We have developed a database that allows systematic recording of pathological and radiological information regarding breast cancers. Additionally, it can record the geographic position of the cancer with minimal memory requirements. Statistical differences in the distribution of false negative and screen detected cancers have been demonstrated and the stylized diagrams reinforce the importance of the conventional review areas. Although this has not identified any "blind spots" in our own readers, it nevertheless provides film readers with a tool to audit their own work.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
S Meeson, K C Young, M G Wallis, J Cooke, A Cummin, and M L Ramsdale
Image features of true positive and false negative cancers in screening mammograms
Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2003; 76(901): 13 - 21.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2001 by the British Institute of Radiology.