比较数字乳腺 X 光摄影和数字乳腺断层合成系统的纵向硅成像研究。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Medical physics Pub Date : 2024-12-17 DOI:10.1002/mp.17571
Miguel A. Lago, Aldo Badano
{"title":"比较数字乳腺 X 光摄影和数字乳腺断层合成系统的纵向硅成像研究。","authors":"Miguel A. Lago,&nbsp;Aldo Badano","doi":"10.1002/mp.17571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>In silico clinical trials are becoming more sophisticated and allow for realistic assessment and comparisons of medical image system models. These fully computational models enable fast and affordable trial designs that can closely capture trends seen on real clinical trials.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate three breast imaging system models for digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a fully-in-silico longitudinal study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We developed in silico models for three different breast imaging systems by modeling relevant characteristics such as detector technology, pixel size, number of projections, and angular span. We use a computational image reader to detect masses at different growing stages to compute the relative system performance. Similarly, we compare calcification cluster detectability across systems. The Detectability area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated for each combination of breast density, device model, lesion size and type, and search area. We compared the absolute and relative AUC values for DM and DBT. The trial consisted of 45 000 simulated images corresponding to 750 virtual digital patient models.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We observed proportional AUC values with increasing mass size. On the other hand, higher breast densities showed lower AUC values. For masses, we found significant performance differences between device models. The highest average AUC difference between DBT and DM was 0.109, benefiting DBT. For calcifications, DM showed higher performance than DBT, especially in highly dense breasts. The highest AUC difference on a model was –0.055, benefiting DM.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>In this fully-in-silico imaging trial, we compared three imaging systems with different detector technologies on the same cohort of virtual digital patient models. We found that breast device systems can lead to visibility differences in masses and calcifications. Our longitudinal, multi-device in silico study was possible because of the versatility and flexibility of in silico methods. This study shows the advantages of this in silico methodology in lowering the resources needed for device development, optimization, and regulatory evaluation.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18384,"journal":{"name":"Medical physics","volume":"52 3","pages":"1960-1968"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Longitudinal in silico imaging study comparing digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis systems\",\"authors\":\"Miguel A. Lago,&nbsp;Aldo Badano\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mp.17571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>In silico clinical trials are becoming more sophisticated and allow for realistic assessment and comparisons of medical image system models. These fully computational models enable fast and affordable trial designs that can closely capture trends seen on real clinical trials.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate three breast imaging system models for digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a fully-in-silico longitudinal study.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We developed in silico models for three different breast imaging systems by modeling relevant characteristics such as detector technology, pixel size, number of projections, and angular span. We use a computational image reader to detect masses at different growing stages to compute the relative system performance. Similarly, we compare calcification cluster detectability across systems. The Detectability area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated for each combination of breast density, device model, lesion size and type, and search area. We compared the absolute and relative AUC values for DM and DBT. The trial consisted of 45 000 simulated images corresponding to 750 virtual digital patient models.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We observed proportional AUC values with increasing mass size. On the other hand, higher breast densities showed lower AUC values. For masses, we found significant performance differences between device models. The highest average AUC difference between DBT and DM was 0.109, benefiting DBT. For calcifications, DM showed higher performance than DBT, especially in highly dense breasts. The highest AUC difference on a model was –0.055, benefiting DM.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>In this fully-in-silico imaging trial, we compared three imaging systems with different detector technologies on the same cohort of virtual digital patient models. We found that breast device systems can lead to visibility differences in masses and calcifications. Our longitudinal, multi-device in silico study was possible because of the versatility and flexibility of in silico methods. This study shows the advantages of this in silico methodology in lowering the resources needed for device development, optimization, and regulatory evaluation.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical physics\",\"volume\":\"52 3\",\"pages\":\"1960-1968\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mp.17571\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mp.17571","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:硅学临床试验正变得越来越复杂,可以对医学影像系统模型进行真实的评估和比较。目的:在一项全硅学纵向研究中评估数字乳腺 X 线照相术(DM)和数字乳腺断层合成术(DBT)的三种乳腺成像系统模型:我们通过对探测器技术、像素大小、投影数量和角度跨度等相关特征进行建模,为三种不同的乳腺成像系统开发了硅模型。我们使用计算图像阅读器检测不同生长阶段的肿块,计算系统的相对性能。同样,我们还比较了不同系统对钙化团块的检测能力。针对乳腺密度、设备型号、病变大小和类型以及搜索区域的每种组合,计算 ROC 曲线下的可检测性面积(AUC)。我们比较了 DM 和 DBT 的绝对和相对 AUC 值。试验包括与 750 个虚拟数字患者模型相对应的 45 000 张模拟图像:结果:我们观察到,随着肿块大小的增加,AUC 值也随之增加。另一方面,乳房密度越高,AUC 值越低。对于肿块,我们发现不同设备模型之间存在明显的性能差异。DBT和DM的平均AUC差异最大,达到0.109,DBT更胜一筹。对于钙化,DM的性能高于DBT,尤其是在高密度乳房中。一个模型的最高AUC差异为-0.055,DM获益:在这项完全模拟成像试验中,我们在同一批虚拟数字患者模型上比较了三种采用不同探测器技术的成像系统。我们发现,乳腺设备系统会导致肿块和钙化的可见度差异。由于硅学方法的多功能性和灵活性,我们的纵向、多设备硅学研究成为可能。这项研究显示了这种硅学方法在降低设备开发、优化和监管评估所需资源方面的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Longitudinal in silico imaging study comparing digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis systems

Background

In silico clinical trials are becoming more sophisticated and allow for realistic assessment and comparisons of medical image system models. These fully computational models enable fast and affordable trial designs that can closely capture trends seen on real clinical trials.

Purpose

To evaluate three breast imaging system models for digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a fully-in-silico longitudinal study.

Methods

We developed in silico models for three different breast imaging systems by modeling relevant characteristics such as detector technology, pixel size, number of projections, and angular span. We use a computational image reader to detect masses at different growing stages to compute the relative system performance. Similarly, we compare calcification cluster detectability across systems. The Detectability area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated for each combination of breast density, device model, lesion size and type, and search area. We compared the absolute and relative AUC values for DM and DBT. The trial consisted of 45 000 simulated images corresponding to 750 virtual digital patient models.

Results

We observed proportional AUC values with increasing mass size. On the other hand, higher breast densities showed lower AUC values. For masses, we found significant performance differences between device models. The highest average AUC difference between DBT and DM was 0.109, benefiting DBT. For calcifications, DM showed higher performance than DBT, especially in highly dense breasts. The highest AUC difference on a model was –0.055, benefiting DM.

Conclusions

In this fully-in-silico imaging trial, we compared three imaging systems with different detector technologies on the same cohort of virtual digital patient models. We found that breast device systems can lead to visibility differences in masses and calcifications. Our longitudinal, multi-device in silico study was possible because of the versatility and flexibility of in silico methods. This study shows the advantages of this in silico methodology in lowering the resources needed for device development, optimization, and regulatory evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical physics
Medical physics 医学-核医学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Medical Physics publishes original, high impact physics, imaging science, and engineering research that advances patient diagnosis and therapy through contributions in 1) Basic science developments with high potential for clinical translation 2) Clinical applications of cutting edge engineering and physics innovations 3) Broadly applicable and innovative clinical physics developments Medical Physics is a journal of global scope and reach. By publishing in Medical Physics your research will reach an international, multidisciplinary audience including practicing medical physicists as well as physics- and engineering based translational scientists. We work closely with authors of promising articles to improve their quality.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信