Breast | The detective's toolkit: Unmasking breast ultrasound (cont.)
Tracks
Room 7 | Virtual
Breast
| Friday, May 29, 2026 |
| 4:00 PM - 4:50 PM |
| Rm 7 | First Floor |
Speaker
Ms Christina Hennig
Sonographer
Diagnostic Imaging for Women
Non-mass (grey) breast cancer findings on ultrasound **NEW VOICE**
4:00 PM - 4:20 PMBiography
Ms Christina Hennig |
Diagnostic Imaging for Women
Christina (Tina) is a dedicated sonographer currently specialising in breast and women's health imaging.
Ms Kellie-Anne Parker
Sonographer
Diagnostic Imaging for Women
Non-mass (grey) breast cancer findings on ultrasound **NEW VOICE**
4:00 PM - 4:20 PMBiography
Ms Kellie-Anne Parker |
Diagnostic Imaging for Women
Kellie-Anne is a general sonographer who has developed a special interest in advaced women's imaging including breast, gynae and obstetric studies.
Miss Georgie McGuire
Sonographer
Brisbane Radiology
Quiet clues: The art of detecting subtle breast malignancies **NEW VOICE**
4:20 PM - 4:40 PMPresentation Synopsis / Abstract
This presentation will explore both the typical and the uncommon, subtle characteristics in the categorisation of benign versus malignant breast lesions. Drawing upon literature and experience, specific characteristics will be explored using examples, as well as strategies for discerning these features. This presentation aims to provide the audience with knowledge and strategies for more discerning categorisation of breast lesions, and for viewing breast malignancy screening through a fresh lens.
Biography
Miss Georgie McGuire |
Brisbane Radiology
Georgie is a general sonographer with a particular interest in women’s imaging. She enjoys the challenge of a complex case and solving a clinical puzzle.
Assoc Prof Jillian Clarke
Associate Professor
The University of Sydney
Comparative performance of radiologists and sonographers in breast ultrasound interpretation: Results from the ULTRA_BREAST study
4:40 PM - 4:50 PMPresentation Synopsis / Abstract
Introduction: Mammography test-sets from the BREAST program have been widely used to evaluate educational impact on cancer detection performance, however evidence in the modality of breast ultrasound remains limited. This study reports findings from the ULTRA_BREAST: Enhancing Diagnostic Proficiency in Breast Ultrasound project, which aimed to explore the diagnostic performance of sonographers and radiologists in interpreting breast ultrasound images.
Method: Readers reviewed all cases in a breast ultrasound test-set of 35 cases (10 biopsy-proven cancers, 25 benign) and localised any abnormalities, scoring them from 1 (normal) to 5 (highly suggestive of malignancy). Performance metrics included case sensitivity, specificity, and lesion sensitivity. Group comparisons were conducted using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Institutional ethics approval was granted.
Results: Radiologists (n=22) demonstrated slightly higher mean performance in most metrics except specificity, although no statistically significant differences were observed. Radiologists achieved a mean case sensitivity of 97.73%, 73.27% specificity, and 96.82% lesion sensitivity. Sonographers (n=20) achieved a mean case sensitivity of 91.0%, 79.2% specificity, and 91.0% lesion sensitivity. Among sonographers, those who routinely practice using either comprehensive or targeted ultrasound images alone demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity compared with those who routinely work with both comprehensive and targeted image sets (98.57% vs 85.45%, p=0.04).
Conclusion: Radiologists and sonographers demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance in breast ultrasound interpretation. For sonographers, consistent practice was associated with higher cancer lesion detection sensitivity. Further results are expected as the project continues.
Take home message: Sonographers’ workflow consistency emerged as a key factor in lesion detection.
Method: Readers reviewed all cases in a breast ultrasound test-set of 35 cases (10 biopsy-proven cancers, 25 benign) and localised any abnormalities, scoring them from 1 (normal) to 5 (highly suggestive of malignancy). Performance metrics included case sensitivity, specificity, and lesion sensitivity. Group comparisons were conducted using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Institutional ethics approval was granted.
Results: Radiologists (n=22) demonstrated slightly higher mean performance in most metrics except specificity, although no statistically significant differences were observed. Radiologists achieved a mean case sensitivity of 97.73%, 73.27% specificity, and 96.82% lesion sensitivity. Sonographers (n=20) achieved a mean case sensitivity of 91.0%, 79.2% specificity, and 91.0% lesion sensitivity. Among sonographers, those who routinely practice using either comprehensive or targeted ultrasound images alone demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity compared with those who routinely work with both comprehensive and targeted image sets (98.57% vs 85.45%, p=0.04).
Conclusion: Radiologists and sonographers demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance in breast ultrasound interpretation. For sonographers, consistent practice was associated with higher cancer lesion detection sensitivity. Further results are expected as the project continues.
Take home message: Sonographers’ workflow consistency emerged as a key factor in lesion detection.
Biography
Assoc Prof Jillian Clarke |
The University of Sydney
Jill is an experienced, accredited, dual qualified (general and cardiac) sonographer with extensive vascular expertise, turned full time academic, passionate about learning and teaching, with both a Master’s and a PhD in Education. She strives to encourage, enable, and inspire excellent ultrasound research, and collaborates across Faculty, University and Profession. She supervises sonographers’ PhD research and Diagnostic Radiography student research across PhD, Master’s and Honours levels. She also provides co-supervision for health, medicine and engineering students to ensure quality ultrasound practice in research. Her research profile includes authorship / co-authorship of 66 papers with 990 citations, and an h-Index of 17 (Scopus, July 2025).
