0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Artificial Intelligence as Supporting Reader in Breast Screening: A Novel Workflow to Preserve Quality and Reduce Workload

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To evaluate the effectiveness of a new strategy for using artificial intelligence (AI) as supporting reader for the detection of breast cancer in mammography-based double reading screening practice.

          Methods

          Large-scale multi-site, multi-vendor data were used to retrospectively evaluate a new paradigm of AI-supported reading. Here, the AI served as the second reader only if it agrees with the recall/no-recall decision of the first human reader. Otherwise, a second human reader made an assessment followed by the standard clinical workflow. The data included 280 594 cases from 180 542 female participants screened for breast cancer at seven screening sites in two countries and using equipment from four hardware vendors. The statistical analysis included non-inferiority and superiority testing of cancer screening performance and evaluation of the reduction in workload, measured as arbitration rate and number of cases requiring second human reading.

          Results

          Artificial intelligence as a supporting reader was found to be superior or noninferior on all screening metrics compared with human double reading while reducing the number of cases requiring second human reading by up to 87% (245 395/280 594). Compared with AI as an independent reader, the number of cases referred to arbitration was reduced from 13% (35 199/280 594) to 2% (5056/280 594).

          Conclusion

          The simulation indicates that the proposed workflow retains screening performance of human double reading while substantially reducing the workload. Further research should study the impact on the second human reader because they would only assess cases in which the AI prediction and first human reader disagree.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.

            After the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved computer-aided detection (CAD) for mammography in 1998, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) provided increased payment in 2002, CAD technology disseminated rapidly. Despite sparse evidence that CAD improves accuracy of mammographic interpretations and costs over $400 million a year, CAD is currently used for most screening mammograms in the United States.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Deep Neural Networks Improve Radiologists’ Performance in Breast Cancer Screening

              We present a deep convolutional neural network for breast cancer screening exam classification, trained, and evaluated on over 200 000 exams (over 1 000 000 images). Our network achieves an AUC of 0.895 in predicting the presence of cancer in the breast, when tested on the screening population. We attribute the high accuracy to a few technical advances. 1) Our network’s novel two-stage architecture and training procedure, which allows us to use a high-capacity patch-level network to learn from pixel-level labels alongside a network learning from macroscopic breast-level labels. 2) A custom ResNet-based network used as a building block of our model, whose balance of depth and width is optimized for high-resolution medical images. 3) Pretraining the network on screening BI-RADS classification, a related task with more noisy labels. 4) Combining multiple input views in an optimal way among a number of possible choices. To validate our model, we conducted a reader study with 14 readers, each reading 720 screening mammogram exams, and show that our model is as accurate as experienced radiologists when presented with the same data. We also show that a hybrid model, averaging the probability of malignancy predicted by a radiologist with a prediction of our neural network, is more accurate than either of the two separately. To further understand our results, we conduct a thorough analysis of our network’s performance on different subpopulations of the screening population, the model’s design, training procedure, errors, and properties of its internal representations. Our best models are publicly available at https://github.com/nyukat/breast_cancer_classifier.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Journal of Breast Imaging
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                2631-6110
                2631-6129
                May 01 2023
                May 22 2023
                March 31 2023
                May 01 2023
                May 22 2023
                March 31 2023
                : 5
                : 3
                : 267-276
                Article
                10.1093/jbi/wbad010
                52bf050a-cf93-490e-954c-d2ee68258c84
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article