title: Comparing performance of the CADstream and the DynaCAD breast MRI CAD systems : CADstream vs. DynaCAD in breast MRI.
abstract: Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems are software programs that use algorithms to find patterns associated with breast cancer on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The most commonly used CAD systems in the USA are CADstream (CS) (Merge Healthcare Inc., Chicago, IL) and DynaCAD for Breast (DC) (Invivo, Gainesville, FL). Our primary objective in this study was to compare the CS and DC breast MRI CAD systems for diagnostic accuracy and postprocessed image quality. Our secondary objective was to compare the evaluation times of radiologists using each system. Three radiologists evaluated 30 biopsy-proven malignant lesions and 29 benign lesions on CS and DC and rated the lesions' malignancy status using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Image quality was ranked on a 0-5 scale, and mean reading times were also recorded. CS detected 70 % of the malignant and 32 % of the benign lesions while DC detected 81 % of the malignant lesions and 34 % of the benign lesions. Analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed that the difference in diagnostic performance was not statistically significant. On image quality scores, CS had significantly higher volume rendering (VR) (p < 0.0001) and motion correction (MC) scores (p < 0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in the remaining image quality scores. Differences in evaluation times between DC and CS were also not statistically significant. We conclude that both CS and DC perform similarly in aiding detection of breast cancer on MRI. MRI CAD selection will likely be based on other factors, such as user interface and image quality preferences, including MC and VR.
authors.affiliation: Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Rice University, P.O. Box 1892, MS-140, Houston, TX, 77251-1892, USA, jlp7@rice.edu.
authors.forename: Joann
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Pan
authors.forename: Basak E
authors.initials: BE
authors.lastname: Dogan
authors.forename: Selin
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Carkaci
authors.forename: Lumarie
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Santiago
authors.forename: Elsa
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Arribas
authors.forename: Scott B
authors.initials: SB
authors.lastname: Cantor
authors.forename: Wei
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Wei
authors.forename: R Jason
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Stafford
authors.forename: Gary J
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: Whitman
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D019540:Area Under Curve; D001940:Breast / Q000473:pathology; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D008327:Mammography / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D015588:Observer Variation; D012372:ROC Curve; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D055815:Young Adult