Measurement challenge : protocol for international case–control comparison of mammographic measures that predict breast cancer risk

Introduction: For women of the same age and body mass index, increased mammographic density is one of the strongest predictors of breast cancer risk. There are multiple methods of measuring mammographic density and other features in a mammogram that could potentially be used in a screening setting to identify and target women at high risk of developing breast cancer. However, it is unclear which measurement method provides the strongest predictor of breast cancer risk. Methods and analysis: The measurement challenge has been established as an international resource to offer a common set of anonymised mammogram images for measurement and analysis. To date, full field digital mammogram images and core data from 1650 cases and 1929 controls from five countries have been collated. The measurement challenge is an ongoing collaboration and we are continuing to expand the resource to include additional image sets across different populations (from contributors) and to compare additional measurement methods (by challengers). The intended use of the measurement challenge resource is for refinement and validation of new and existing mammographic measurement methods. The measurement challenge resource provides a standardised dataset of mammographic images and core data that enables investigators to directly compare methods of measuring mammographic density or other mammographic features in case/control sets of both raw and processed images, for the purposes of the comparing their predictions of breast cancer risk. Ethics and dissemination: Challengers and contributors are required to enter a Research Collaboration Agreement with the University of Melbourne prior to participation in the measurement challenge. The Challenge database of collated data and images are stored in a secure data repository at the University of Melbourne. Ethics approval for the measurement challenge is held at University of Melbourne (HREC ID 0931343.3)

Comparison between two packages for pectoral muscle removal on mammographic images

Background: Pectoral muscle removal is a fundamental preliminary step in computer-aided diagnosis systems for full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Currently, two open-source publicly available packages (LIBRA and OpenBreast) provide algorithms for pectoral muscle removal within Matlab environment. Purpose: To compare performance of the two packages on a single database of FFDM images. Methods: Only mediolateral oblique (MLO) FFDM was considered because of large presence of pectoral muscle on this type of projection. For obtaining ground truth, pectoral muscle has been manually segmented by two radiologists in consensus. Both LIBRA’s and OpenBreast’s removal performance with respect to ground truth were compared using Dice similarity coefficient and Cohen-kappa reliability coefficient; Wilcoxon signed-rank test has been used for assessing differences in performances; Kruskal–Wallis test has been used to verify possible dependence of the performance from the breast density or image laterality. Results: FFDMs from 168 consecutive women at our institution have been included in the study. Both LIBRA’s Dice-index and Cohen-kappa were significantly higher than OpenBreast (Wilcoxon signed-rank test P < 0.05). No dependence on breast density or laterality has been found (Kruskal–Wallis test P > 0.05). Conclusion: Libra has a better performance than OpenBreast in pectoral muscle delineation so that, although our study has not a direct clinical application, these results are useful in the choice of packages for the development of complex systems for computer-aided breast evaluation