Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2025
Detection of Architectural Distortion in Prior Mammograms via Analysis of Oriented Patterns
Published on: August 30, 2013
Test-set training improves the detection rates of invasive cancer in screening mammography
1Medical Image Optimisation and Perception Research Group (MIOPeG), Medical Imaging Science, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia; Department of Radiological Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Aim:
To investigate if mammographic test-set participation affects routine breast cancer screening performance.
Materials And Methods:
Clinical audit data between 2008 and 2018 were collected for 35 breast screen readers who participated in the BreastScreen Reader Assessment Strategy (BREAST) and 22 readers with no history of test-set participation. For BREAST readers, the annual audit data were divided according to the year they completed their first test set, and the same years were used randomly to align and divide the data of non-BREAST readers into pre- and post-test set periods. Multiple audit parameters were inspected retrospectively for the two cohorts to identify how their reading performance has evolved in screening mammography.
Results:
Investigating 2 calendar years before and after test-set participation, BREAST and non-BREAST readers recalled lower rates of women in the latter period (p=0.03 and p=0.02, respectively). They also improved their positive predictive value (PPV; p=0.01 and p=0.02, respectively). BREAST readers additionally improved their detection rates of invasive cancer (p=0.02) and all cancers (p=0.01). In an extended 3-year comparison, similar improvements occurred in the recall rate for BREAST (p=0.02) and non-BREAST readers (p=0.02) and in PPV (p=0.001, 0.01, respectively); however, improvements in detection rates also occurred exclusively in BREAST readers' performance for invasive cancer (p=0.04), DCIS (p=0.05), and all cancers (p=0.02); however, significant improvements in detection did not involve <15 mm invasive cancers in both periods. Meanwhile, non-BREAST readers demonstrated a decrease in sensitivity (p=0.02).
Conclusion:
Participation in test sets is linked to over-time improvements in most audit-measured cancer detection rates.
