Cargando…
Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to identify normal mammograms in a screening population. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 9581 double-read mammography screening exams including 68 screen-detected cancers and 187 false positives, a subcohort of the prospecti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7880910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32876835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07165-1 |
_version_ | 1783650767120367616 |
---|---|
author | Lång, Kristina Dustler, Magnus Dahlblom, Victor Åkesson, Anna Andersson, Ingvar Zackrisson, Sophia |
author_facet | Lång, Kristina Dustler, Magnus Dahlblom, Victor Åkesson, Anna Andersson, Ingvar Zackrisson, Sophia |
author_sort | Lång, Kristina |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to identify normal mammograms in a screening population. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 9581 double-read mammography screening exams including 68 screen-detected cancers and 187 false positives, a subcohort of the prospective population-based Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, were analysed with a deep learning–based AI system. The AI system categorises mammograms with a cancer risk score increasing from 1 to 10. The effect on cancer detection and false positives of excluding mammograms below different AI risk thresholds from reading by radiologists was investigated. A panel of three breast radiologists assessed the radiographic appearance, type, and visibility of screen-detected cancers assigned low-risk scores (≤ 5). The reduction of normal exams, cancers, and false positives for the different thresholds was presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: If mammograms scored 1 and 2 were excluded from screen-reading, 1829 (19.1%; 95% CI 18.3–19.9) exams could be removed, including 10 (5.3%; 95% CI 2.1–8.6) false positives but no cancers. In total, 5082 (53.0%; 95% CI 52.0–54.0) exams, including 7 (10.3%; 95% CI 3.1–17.5) cancers and 52 (27.8%; 95% CI 21.4–34.2) false positives, had low-risk scores. All, except one, of the seven screen-detected cancers with low-risk scores were judged to be clearly visible. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated AI system can correctly identify a proportion of a screening population as cancer-free and also reduce false positives. Thus, AI has the potential to improve mammography screening efficiency. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective study showed that AI can identify a proportion of mammograms as normal in a screening population. • Excluding normal exams from screening using AI can reduce false positives. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7880910 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78809102021-02-18 Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence Lång, Kristina Dustler, Magnus Dahlblom, Victor Åkesson, Anna Andersson, Ingvar Zackrisson, Sophia Eur Radiol Breast OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to identify normal mammograms in a screening population. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 9581 double-read mammography screening exams including 68 screen-detected cancers and 187 false positives, a subcohort of the prospective population-based Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, were analysed with a deep learning–based AI system. The AI system categorises mammograms with a cancer risk score increasing from 1 to 10. The effect on cancer detection and false positives of excluding mammograms below different AI risk thresholds from reading by radiologists was investigated. A panel of three breast radiologists assessed the radiographic appearance, type, and visibility of screen-detected cancers assigned low-risk scores (≤ 5). The reduction of normal exams, cancers, and false positives for the different thresholds was presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: If mammograms scored 1 and 2 were excluded from screen-reading, 1829 (19.1%; 95% CI 18.3–19.9) exams could be removed, including 10 (5.3%; 95% CI 2.1–8.6) false positives but no cancers. In total, 5082 (53.0%; 95% CI 52.0–54.0) exams, including 7 (10.3%; 95% CI 3.1–17.5) cancers and 52 (27.8%; 95% CI 21.4–34.2) false positives, had low-risk scores. All, except one, of the seven screen-detected cancers with low-risk scores were judged to be clearly visible. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated AI system can correctly identify a proportion of a screening population as cancer-free and also reduce false positives. Thus, AI has the potential to improve mammography screening efficiency. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective study showed that AI can identify a proportion of mammograms as normal in a screening population. • Excluding normal exams from screening using AI can reduce false positives. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-09-02 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7880910/ /pubmed/32876835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07165-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Breast Lång, Kristina Dustler, Magnus Dahlblom, Victor Åkesson, Anna Andersson, Ingvar Zackrisson, Sophia Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title | Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title_full | Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title_fullStr | Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title_full_unstemmed | Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title_short | Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
title_sort | identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence |
topic | Breast |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7880910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32876835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07165-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT langkristina identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence AT dustlermagnus identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence AT dahlblomvictor identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence AT akessonanna identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence AT anderssoningvar identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence AT zackrissonsophia identifyingnormalmammogramsinalargescreeningpopulationusingartificialintelligence |