Table 5.

Performance level (AUC values) and database description of several previously reported studies applying CAD schemes for mammographic mass classification

CAD system	Year	AUC	Comments on number of masses and on reported AUC values
Varela et al. [10]	2006	0.81	1076 mass ROIs trained and tested using a leave-one- case-out method
Shi et al. [12]	2008	0.84	329 ROIs (132 benign and 197 malignant) evaluated as an independent test set
Retico et al. [16]	2006	0.80	226 massive lesions (117 benign and 109 malignant) trained and tested using 5 replications of the two-fold cross-validation method [76]
Mudigonda et al. [53]	2000	0.85; 0.67 (jack- knife classification)	54 images (28 benign and 26 malignant) from a local database and the MIAS database
Land [77]	2004	0.78	1979 cases (994 benign and 985 malignant) trained and tested using a five-fold cross-validation method
Huo [23]	2000	0.82 or 0.81	110 cases (50 malignant and 60 benign) evaluated as an independent test set. AUC value depends on the dataset and on whether the hybrid or ANN classifier was used
Heidt [78]	2009 0.60		206 ROIs (92 benign and 114 malignant) trained and tested using a ten-fold cross-validation method
Eltonsy [79]	2007 0.80		350 cases (82 normal and 268 malignant) trained and tested using a five-fold cross-validation method