STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF TOTAL MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION CHANGES ON OBSERVER PERFORMANCE USING CLINICAL MAMMOGRAMS

The main goal of this study was to relate physical changes in image quality measured by Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) to diagnostic accuracy.^ One Hundred and Fifty Kodak Min-R screen/film combination conventional craniocaudal mammograms obtained with the Pfizer Microfocus Mammographic system were selected from the files of the Department of Radiology, at M.D. Anderson Hospital and Tumor Institute.^ The mammograms included 88 cases with a variety of benign diagnosis and 62 cases with a variety of malignant biopsy diagnosis. The average age of the patient population was 55 years old. 70 cases presented calcifications with 30 cases having calcifications smaller than 0.5mm. 46 cases presented irregular bordered masses larger than 1 cm. 30 cases presented smooth bordered masses with 20 larger than 1 cm.^ Four separated copies of the original images were made each having a different change in the MTF using a defocusing technique whereby copies of the original were obtained by light exposure through different thicknesses (spacing) of transparent film base.^ The mammograms were randomized, and evaluated by three experienced mammographers for the degree of visibility of various anatomical breast structures and pathological lesions (masses and calicifications), subjective image quality, and mammographic interpretation.^ 3,000 separate evaluations were anayzed by several statistical techniques including Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, McNemar test for differences between proportions and the Landis et al. method of agreement weighted kappa for ordinal categorical data.^ Results from the statistical analysis show: (1) There were no statistical significant differences in the diagnostic accuracy of the observers when diagnosing from mammograms with the same MTF. (2) There were no statistically significant differences in diagnostic accuracy for each observer when diagnosing from mammograms with the different MTF's used in the study. (3) There statistical significant differences in detail visibility between the copies and the originals. Detail visibility was better in the originals. (4) Feature interpretations were not significantly different between the originals and the copies. (5) Perception of image quality did not affect image interpretation.^ Continuation and improvement of this research ca be accomplished by: using a case population more sensitive to MTF changes, i.e., asymptomatic women with minimum breast cancer, more observers (including less experienced radiologists and experienced technologists) must collaborate in the study, and using a minimum of 200 benign and 200 malignant cases.^

A simulation study of the effects of small center enrollment in multi -center clinical trials

Multi-center clinical trials are very common in the development of new drugs and devices. One concern in such trials, is the effect of individual investigational sites enrolling small numbers of patients on the overall result. Can the presence of small centers cause an ineffective treatment to appear effective when treatment-by-center interaction is not statistically significant?^ In this research, simulations are used to study the effect that centers enrolling few patients may have on the analysis of clinical trial data. A multi-center clinical trial with 20 sites is simulated to investigate the effect of a new treatment in comparison to a placebo treatment. Twelve of these 20 investigational sites are considered small, each enrolling less than four patients per treatment group. Three clinical trials are simulated with sample sizes of 100, 170 and 300. The simulated data is generated with various characteristics, one in which treatment should be considered effective and another where treatment is not effective. Qualitative interactions are also produced within the small sites to further investigate the effect of small centers under various conditions.^ Standard analysis of variance methods and the "sometimes-pool" testing procedure are applied to the simulated data. One model investigates treatment and center effect and treatment-by-center interaction. Another model investigates treatment effect alone. These analyses are used to determine the power to detect treatment-by-center interactions, and the probability of type I error.^ We find it is difficult to detect treatment-by-center interactions when only a few investigational sites enrolling a limited number of patients participate in the interaction. However, we find no increased risk of type I error in these situations. In a pooled analysis, when the treatment is not effective, the probability of finding a significant treatment effect in the absence of significant treatment-by-center interaction is well within standard limits of type I error. ^