Dr. Matthew G. Wallis Profile

Dr. Matthew G. Wallis

Consultant Radiologist at NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Ctr.

SPIE Involvement:

Author

Publications (18)

Proceedings Article | 22 May 2020 Paper

Paper

Can AI serve as an independent second reader of mammograms? a simulation study

Alejandro Rodríguez-Ruiz, Kristina Lång, Albert Gubern-Merida, Mireille Broeders, Gisella Gennaro, Paola Clauser, Thomas Helbich, Thomas Mertelmeier, Margarita Chevalier, Matthew Wallis, Ingvar Andersson, Sophia Zackrisson, R. Mann, I. Sechopoulos

Proceedings Volume 11513, 115130O (2020) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2564114

KEYWORDS: Artificial intelligence, Mammography, Databases, Cancer, Breast, Intelligence systems, Breast cancer, Evolutionary algorithms, Digital mammography, Oncology

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 4 March 2019 Presentation + Paper

Presentation + Paper

An observer study to assess the detection of calcification clusters using 2D mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and synthetic 2D imaging

Alistair Mackenzie, Emma Thomson, Premkumar Elangovan, Chantal van Ongeval, Lesley Cockmartin, Lucy Warren, Rosalind Given-Wilson, Louise Wilkinson, Matthew Wallis, David Dance, Kenneth Young

Proceedings Volume 10952, 109520U (2019) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2506895

KEYWORDS: Digital breast tomosynthesis, Cancer, Mammography, Breast, Clinical trials, Visibility, Digital mammography, Image processing, Medicine, Image processing software

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 4 March 2019 Paper

Paper

Changes in breast density

L. Warren, M. Halling-Brown, L. Wilkinson, R. Given-Wilson, R. McAvinchey, M. Wallis, D. Dance, K. Young

Proceedings Volume 10952, 109520W (2019) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2512252

KEYWORDS: Breast, Cancer, Mammography, Databases, Physics, Breast cancer, Breast imaging

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 9 March 2018 Presentation + Paper

Presentation + Paper

Design and validation of biologically inspired spiculated breast lesion models utilizing structural tissue distortion

Premkumar Elangovan, Elena Mihalas, Majdi Alnowami, Kenneth Young, David Dance, Victoria Cooke, Louise Wilkinson, Rosalind Given-Wilson, Matthew Wallis, Kevin Wells

Proceedings Volume 10573, 105730B (2018) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2293421

KEYWORDS: Digital breast tomosynthesis, Tissues, Distortion, Breast, Image processing, 3D modeling, Binary data, Visualization, Clinical trials, Modeling

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 6 March 2018 Presentation + Paper

Presentation + Paper

Development of a national electronic interval cancer review for breast screening

M. Halling-Brown, M. Patel, M. Wallis, K. Young

Proceedings Volume 10579, 105790E (2018) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2293485

KEYWORDS: Cancer, Databases, Breast, Medical imaging, Image processing, Breast cancer, Inspection, Picture Archiving and Communication System, Mammography, Medical research

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 10 March 2017 Paper

Paper

Changing behavior and accuracy with time on task in mammography screening

Sian Taylor-Phillips, David Jenkinson, Chris Stinton, Matthew Wallis, Aileen Clarke

Proceedings Volume 10136, 101360C (2017) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2254288

KEYWORDS: Cancer, Mammography, Breast, Analytical research, Image analysis, Image display, Radiology, Target detection, Medical imaging, Computing systems, Radar, Image compression

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 9 March 2017 Presentation + Paper

Presentation + Paper

Lesion characterization in spectral photon-counting tomosynthesis

Björn Cederström, Erik Fredenberg, Karl Berggren, Klaus Erhard, Mats Danielsson, Matthew Wallis

Proceedings Volume 10132, 1013205 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2253966

KEYWORDS: Mammography, Photon counting, Tissues, Imaging spectroscopy, Solids, Radiography, Breast, Aluminum, Tumors, Calibration, Interference (communication), X-rays, Sensors

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 24 March 2016 Paper

Paper

Impact of two types of image processing on cancer detection in mammography

Lucy Warren, Mark Halling-Brown, Padraig Looney, David Dance, Louise Wilkinson, Matthew Wallis, Rosalind Given-Wilson, Julie Cooke, Rita McAvinchey, Kenneth Young

Proceedings Volume 9787, 978704 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2216384

KEYWORDS: Breast cancer, Image processing, Cancer, Mammography, Image enhancement, Architectural distortion, Image analysis, Gold, Breast, Statistical analysis, Image quality standards, Image quality, Medical imaging

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 18 March 2015 Paper

Paper

X-ray attenuation of adipose breast tissue: in-vitro and in-vivo measurements using spectral imaging

Erik Fredenberg, Klaus Erhard, Karl Berggren, David Dance, Kenneth Young, Björn Cederström, Henrik Johansson, Mats Lundqvist, Elin Moa, Hanno Homan, Paula Willsher, Fleur Kilburn-Toppin, Matthew Wallis

Proceedings Volume 9412, 94121U (2015) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2081747

KEYWORDS: Tissues, Signal attenuation, In vitro testing, Breast, X-rays, In vivo imaging, Aluminum, X-ray imaging, Mammography, Polymethylmethacrylate

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 11 March 2014 Paper

Paper

Using image simulation to test the effect of detector type on breast cancer detection

Alistair Mackenzie, Lucy Warren, David Dance, Dev Chakraborty, Julie Cooke, Mark Halling-Brown, Padraig Looney, Matthew Wallis, Rosalind Given-Wilson, Gavin Alexander, Kenneth Young

Proceedings Volume 9037, 90370I (2014) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2043423

KEYWORDS: Sensors, Image quality, Cancer, Visibility, Modulation transfer functions, Mammography, Breast, Chromium, Imaging systems, Image processing

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 28 March 2013 Paper

Paper

Effect of image processing version on detection of non-calcification cancers in 2D digital mammography imaging

L. Warren, J. Cooke, R. Given-Wilson, M. Wallis, M. Halling-Brown, A. Mackenzie, D. Chakraborty, H. Bosmans, D. Dance, K. Young

Proceedings Volume 8673, 86730O (2013) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2008494

KEYWORDS: Image processing, Cancer, Breast, Digital mammography, Digital imaging, Mammography, Tissues, Image enhancement, Diagnostics, Inspection

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 6 March 2013 Paper

Paper

Measurement of breast-tissue x-ray attenuation by spectral mammography: first results on cyst fluid

Erik Fredenberg, David Dance, Paula Willsher, Miriam von Tiedemann, Kenneth Young, Matthew Wallis

Proceedings Volume 8668, 866820 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2008026

KEYWORDS: Signal attenuation, X-rays, X-ray imaging, Polymethylmethacrylate, Mammography, Aluminum, Water, Breast, Tissues, X-ray technology

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 3 March 2012 Paper

Paper

Mammographic calcification cluster detection and threshold gold thickness measurements

L. Warren, A. Mackenzie, J. Cooke, R. Given-Wilson, M. Wallis, D. Chakraborty, D. Dance, K. Young

Proceedings Volume 8313, 83130J (2012) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.911434

KEYWORDS: Image quality, Gold, Chromium, Mammography, Sensors, Cancer, Image quality standards, Breast, Digital mammography, Digital imaging

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 22 February 2012 Paper

Paper

Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography versus tomosynthesis: effect of radiologists' experience

F. Zanca, M. Wallis, E. Moa, K. Leifland, M. Danielsson, R. Oyen, H. Bosmans

Proceedings Volume 8318, 83180W (2012) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.905276

KEYWORDS: Diagnostics, Mammography, Digital mammography, Breast, Statistical analysis, Cancer, Digital breast tomosynthesis, Roads, Medical imaging, Imaging systems

Read Abstract +

Purpose: To investigate whether readers' experience affects performance in a study comparing 2D digital mammography (2D) with 2-view (CC and MLO) or 1-view (MLO) tomosynthesis. Materials and Methods: One-hundred-thirty 2D cases were collected from screening assessment and referral clinics; 64 of the cases had verified abnormalities and the remaining were confirmed normal. Two-view tomosynthesis images were obtained from the same patients. Ten accredited readers (5 with ≥ 10 years experience in mammography and 5 with < 10 years) classified the cases in terms of malignancy (rate 0-5), and recall (yes/no), for both modalities. A second experiment was performed with the same cases, with 10 other readers (again 5 experienced / 5 less experienced), but using 2D and 1-view tomosynthesis as the two modalities. The multi-reader-multi-case ROC method was applied and the significance of diagnostic accuracy difference of 2D vs tomosynthesis was calculated, as a function of experience and for each experiment. Recall rate (RR) on malignant and benign cases was also calculated, along with reading time. Results: No significant difference was reached between 2D and 2-view tomosynthesis for experienced readers (pvalue= 0.25); for less experienced readers the p-value was significant (0.03). No significant difference was found between 2D and 1-view tomosynthesis, independent of readers' experience. RR for benign cases decreased for tomosynthesis (for booth 1- and 2-view), independent of experience. Average reading time per case was 79 s (range 65- 91 s) and 134 s (range 119-158 s) for experienced readers; 56 s (range 46-67 s) and 115s (range 97-142 s) for nonexperienced, for 2D and 2-view tomosynthesis respectively. Reading time was 74 s (range 43-98 s) and 99 s (range 73- 117 s) for experienced readers; 74 s (range 62-85 s) and 94 s (range 82-137 s) for non-experienced, for 2D and 1-view tomosynthesis respectively. Conclusions: For experienced readers, there is no evidence of improved diagnostic accuracy when using 2-view or 1- view tomosynthesis, while less experienced readers perform better with 2-view tomosynthesis than 2D images. Tomosynthesis reduces the number of recall of benign cases, without hindering cancer detection.

Proceedings Article | 3 March 2011 Paper

Paper

The time course of cancer detection performance

Sian Taylor-Phillips, Aileen Clarke, Matthew Wallis, Margot Wheaton, Alison Duncan, Alastair Gale

Proceedings Volume 7966, 796605 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.881042

KEYWORDS: Mammography, Breast, Cancer, Visualization, Databases, Biopsy, Radiography, Target detection, Medical imaging, Radiology

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 24 February 2010 Paper

Paper

Influencing clinicians and healthcare managers: can ROC be more persuasive?

S. Taylor-Phillips, M. Wallis, A. Duncan, A. Gale

Proceedings Volume 7627, 76270X (2010) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.843784

KEYWORDS: Mammography, Breast, Medicine, Statistical analysis, Radiology, Analytical research, Digital mammography, Radiation effects, Mirrors, Receivers

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 13 March 2009 Paper

Paper

The effect of digitising film prior mammograms on radiologists' performance in breast screening: a JAFROC study

Sian Taylor-Phillips, Matthew Wallis, Alison Duncan, Alastair Gale

Proceedings Volume 7263, 726311 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.810902

KEYWORDS: Mammography, Breast, Digital mammography, Eye, LCDs, Motion analysis, Image quality, Biopsy, Medical imaging

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 6 March 2008 Paper

Paper

Mammography workstation design: effect on mammographer behaviour and the risk of musculoskeletal disorders

S. Taylor-Phillips, M. Wallis, A. Gale

Proceedings Volume 6917, 69171G (2008) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.770202

KEYWORDS: Mammography, Breast, LCDs, Digital mammography, Computer aided diagnosis and therapy, Glasses, Head, Neck, Visualization, Visual analytics

Read Abstract +

Showing 5 of 18 publications

SIGN IN TO:

View contact details

UPDATE YOUR PROFILE

Is this your profile? Update it now.

Sign into your SPIE.org account

Don’t have a profile and want one?

Create an account on SPIE.org

Advertisement

Advertisement