Cargando…
Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection
We compared diagnostic performances between radiologists with reference to clinical information and standalone artificial intelligence (AI) detection of breast cancer on digital mammography. This study included 392 women (average age: 57.3 ± 12.1 years, range: 30–94 years) diagnosed with malignancy...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36611409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010117 |
_version_ | 1784865093587042304 |
---|---|
author | Choi, Won Jae An, Jin Kyung Woo, Jeong Joo Kwak, Hee Yong |
author_facet | Choi, Won Jae An, Jin Kyung Woo, Jeong Joo Kwak, Hee Yong |
author_sort | Choi, Won Jae |
collection | PubMed |
description | We compared diagnostic performances between radiologists with reference to clinical information and standalone artificial intelligence (AI) detection of breast cancer on digital mammography. This study included 392 women (average age: 57.3 ± 12.1 years, range: 30–94 years) diagnosed with malignancy between January 2010 and June 2021 who underwent digital mammography prior to biopsy. Two radiologists assessed mammographic findings based on clinical symptoms and prior mammography. All mammographies were analyzed via AI. Breast cancer detection performance was compared between radiologists and AI based on how the lesion location was concordant between each analysis method (radiologists or AI) and pathological results. Kappa coefficient was used to measure the concordance between radiologists or AI analysis and pathology results. Binominal logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing the concordance between radiologists’ analysis and pathology results. Overall, the concordance was higher in radiologists’ diagnosis than on AI analysis (kappa coefficient: 0.819 vs. 0.698). Impact of prior mammography (odds ratio (OR): 8.55, p < 0.001), clinical symptom (OR: 5.49, p < 0.001), and fatty breast density (OR: 5.18, p = 0.008) were important factors contributing to the concordance of lesion location between radiologists’ diagnosis and pathology results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9818877 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98188772023-01-07 Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection Choi, Won Jae An, Jin Kyung Woo, Jeong Joo Kwak, Hee Yong Diagnostics (Basel) Article We compared diagnostic performances between radiologists with reference to clinical information and standalone artificial intelligence (AI) detection of breast cancer on digital mammography. This study included 392 women (average age: 57.3 ± 12.1 years, range: 30–94 years) diagnosed with malignancy between January 2010 and June 2021 who underwent digital mammography prior to biopsy. Two radiologists assessed mammographic findings based on clinical symptoms and prior mammography. All mammographies were analyzed via AI. Breast cancer detection performance was compared between radiologists and AI based on how the lesion location was concordant between each analysis method (radiologists or AI) and pathological results. Kappa coefficient was used to measure the concordance between radiologists or AI analysis and pathology results. Binominal logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing the concordance between radiologists’ analysis and pathology results. Overall, the concordance was higher in radiologists’ diagnosis than on AI analysis (kappa coefficient: 0.819 vs. 0.698). Impact of prior mammography (odds ratio (OR): 8.55, p < 0.001), clinical symptom (OR: 5.49, p < 0.001), and fatty breast density (OR: 5.18, p = 0.008) were important factors contributing to the concordance of lesion location between radiologists’ diagnosis and pathology results. MDPI 2022-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9818877/ /pubmed/36611409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010117 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Choi, Won Jae An, Jin Kyung Woo, Jeong Joo Kwak, Hee Yong Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title | Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title_full | Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title_short | Comparison of Diagnostic Performance in Mammography Assessment: Radiologist with Reference to Clinical Information Versus Standalone Artificial Intelligence Detection |
title_sort | comparison of diagnostic performance in mammography assessment: radiologist with reference to clinical information versus standalone artificial intelligence detection |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36611409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010117 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT choiwonjae comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceinmammographyassessmentradiologistwithreferencetoclinicalinformationversusstandaloneartificialintelligencedetection AT anjinkyung comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceinmammographyassessmentradiologistwithreferencetoclinicalinformationversusstandaloneartificialintelligencedetection AT woojeongjoo comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceinmammographyassessmentradiologistwithreferencetoclinicalinformationversusstandaloneartificialintelligencedetection AT kwakheeyong comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceinmammographyassessmentradiologistwithreferencetoclinicalinformationversusstandaloneartificialintelligencedetection |