Cargando…
Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set
OBJECTIVE: To pilot a process for the independent external validation of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to detect breast cancer using data from the NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP). METHODS: A representative data set of mammography images from 26,000 women attending 2 NHS screening cent...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The British Institute of Radiology.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9975375/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36607283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20211104 |
_version_ | 1784898861293109248 |
---|---|
author | Cushnan, Dominic Young, Kenneth C Ward, Dominic Halling-Brown, Mark D Duffy, Stephen Given-Wilson, Rosalind Wallis, Matthew G Wilkinson, Louise Lyburn, Iain Sidebottom, Richard McAvinchey, Rita Lewis, Emma B Mackenzie, Alistair Warren, Lucy M |
author_facet | Cushnan, Dominic Young, Kenneth C Ward, Dominic Halling-Brown, Mark D Duffy, Stephen Given-Wilson, Rosalind Wallis, Matthew G Wilkinson, Louise Lyburn, Iain Sidebottom, Richard McAvinchey, Rita Lewis, Emma B Mackenzie, Alistair Warren, Lucy M |
author_sort | Cushnan, Dominic |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To pilot a process for the independent external validation of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to detect breast cancer using data from the NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP). METHODS: A representative data set of mammography images from 26,000 women attending 2 NHS screening centres, and an enriched data set of 2054 positive cases were used from the OPTIMAM image database. The use case of the AI tool was the replacement of the first or second human reader. The performance of the AI tool was compared to that of human readers in the NHSBSP. RESULTS: Recommendations for future external validations of AI tools to detect breast cancer are provided. The tool recalled different breast cancers to the human readers. This study showed the importance of testing AI tools on all types of cases (including non-standard) and the clarity of any warning messages. The acceptable difference in sensitivity and specificity between the AI tool and human readers should be determined. Any information vital for the clinical application should be a required output for the AI tool. It is recommended that the interaction of radiologists with the AI tool, and the effect of the AI tool on arbitration be investigated prior to clinical use. CONCLUSION: This pilot demonstrated several lessons for future independent external validation of AI tools for breast cancer detection. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Knowledge has been gained towards best practice procedures for performing independent external validations of AI tools for the detection of breast cancer using data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9975375 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | The British Institute of Radiology. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99753752023-03-02 Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set Cushnan, Dominic Young, Kenneth C Ward, Dominic Halling-Brown, Mark D Duffy, Stephen Given-Wilson, Rosalind Wallis, Matthew G Wilkinson, Louise Lyburn, Iain Sidebottom, Richard McAvinchey, Rita Lewis, Emma B Mackenzie, Alistair Warren, Lucy M Br J Radiol Diagnostic Radiology: Full Paper OBJECTIVE: To pilot a process for the independent external validation of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to detect breast cancer using data from the NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP). METHODS: A representative data set of mammography images from 26,000 women attending 2 NHS screening centres, and an enriched data set of 2054 positive cases were used from the OPTIMAM image database. The use case of the AI tool was the replacement of the first or second human reader. The performance of the AI tool was compared to that of human readers in the NHSBSP. RESULTS: Recommendations for future external validations of AI tools to detect breast cancer are provided. The tool recalled different breast cancers to the human readers. This study showed the importance of testing AI tools on all types of cases (including non-standard) and the clarity of any warning messages. The acceptable difference in sensitivity and specificity between the AI tool and human readers should be determined. Any information vital for the clinical application should be a required output for the AI tool. It is recommended that the interaction of radiologists with the AI tool, and the effect of the AI tool on arbitration be investigated prior to clinical use. CONCLUSION: This pilot demonstrated several lessons for future independent external validation of AI tools for breast cancer detection. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Knowledge has been gained towards best practice procedures for performing independent external validations of AI tools for the detection of breast cancer using data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme. The British Institute of Radiology. 2023-02 2023-02-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9975375/ /pubmed/36607283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20211104 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Diagnostic Radiology: Full Paper Cushnan, Dominic Young, Kenneth C Ward, Dominic Halling-Brown, Mark D Duffy, Stephen Given-Wilson, Rosalind Wallis, Matthew G Wilkinson, Louise Lyburn, Iain Sidebottom, Richard McAvinchey, Rita Lewis, Emma B Mackenzie, Alistair Warren, Lucy M Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title | Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title_full | Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title_fullStr | Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title_full_unstemmed | Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title_short | Lessons learned from independent external validation of an AI tool to detect breast cancer using a representative UK data set |
title_sort | lessons learned from independent external validation of an ai tool to detect breast cancer using a representative uk data set |
topic | Diagnostic Radiology: Full Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9975375/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36607283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20211104 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cushnandominic lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT youngkennethc lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT warddominic lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT hallingbrownmarkd lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT duffystephen lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT givenwilsonrosalind lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT wallismatthewg lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT wilkinsonlouise lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT lyburniain lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT sidebottomrichard lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT mcavincheyrita lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT lewisemmab lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT mackenziealistair lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset AT warrenlucym lessonslearnedfromindependentexternalvalidationofanaitooltodetectbreastcancerusingarepresentativeukdataset |