Artificial Intelligence Evaluation of 122 969 Mammography Examinations from a Population-based Screening Program

被引:58
|
作者
Larsen, Marthe [1 ]
Aglen, Camilla F. [1 ]
Lee, Christoph, I [5 ,6 ]
Hoff, Solveig R. [7 ,8 ]
Lund-Hanssen, Hakon [9 ]
Lang, Kristina [10 ,11 ]
Nygard, Jan F. [2 ]
Ursin, Giske [3 ]
Hofvind, Solveig [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Sect Breast Canc Screening, POB 5313, N-0304 Oslo, Norway
[2] Dept Register Informat, POB 5313, N-0304 Oslo, Norway
[3] Canc Registry Norway, POB 5313, N-0304 Oslo, Norway
[4] Arctic Univ Norway, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Hlth & Care Sci, Tromso, Norway
[5] Univ Washington, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[6] Univ Washington, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Syst & Populat Hlth, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[7] Alesund Hosp, More & Romsdal Hosp Trust, Dept Radiol, Alesund, Norway
[8] Natl Univ Sci & Technol, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Circulat & Med Imaging, Trondheim, Norway
[9] St Olavs Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, Trondheim, Norway
[10] Lund Univ, Dept Translat Med, Lund, Sweden
[11] Skane Univ Hosp, Unilabs Mammog Unit, Malmo, Sweden
关键词
CANCER; PERFORMANCE; INTERVAL; FILM;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.212381
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results for cancer detection with mammographic screening. However, evidence related to the use of AI in real screening settings remain sparse. Purpose: To compare the performance of a commercially available AI system with routine, independent double reading with consensus as performed in a population-based screening program. Furthermore, the histopathologic characteristics of tumors with different AI scores were explored. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 122 969 screening examinations from 47 877 women performed at four screening units in BreastScreen Norway from October 2009 to December 2018 were included. The data set included 752 screen-detected cancers (6.1 per 1000 examinations) and 205 interval cancers (1.7 per 1000 examinations). Each examination had an AI score between 1 and 10, where 1 indicated low risk of breast cancer and 10 indicated high risk. Threshold 1, threshold 2, and threshold 3 were used to assess the performance of the AI system as a binary decision tool (selected vs not selected). Threshold 1 was set at an AI score of 10, threshold 2 was set to yield a selection rate similar to the consensus rate (8.8%), and threshold 3 was set to yield a selection rate similar to an average individual radiologist (5.8%). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize screening outcomes. Results: A total of 653 of 752 screen-detected cancers (86.8%) and 92 of 205 interval cancers (44.9%) were given a score of 10 by the AI system (threshold 1). Using threshold 3, 80.1% of the screen-detected cancers (602 of 752) and 30.7% of the interval cancers (63 of 205) were selected. Screen-detected cancer with AI scores not selected using the thresholds had favorable histopathologic characteristics compared to those selected; opposite results were observed for interval cancer. Conclusion: The proportion of screen-detected cancers not selected by the artificial intelligence (AI) system at the three evaluated thresholds was less than 20%. The overall performance of the AI system was promising according to cancer detection. (C) RSNA, 2022
引用
收藏
页码:502 / 511
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The outcome of a quality-controlled mammography screening program: Experience from a population-based study in Taiwan
    Pan, Huay-Ben
    Wong, Kam-Fai
    Yang, Tsung-Lung
    Hsu, Giu-Cheng
    Chou, Chen-Pin
    Huang, Jer-Shyung
    Lee, San-Kan
    Chou, Yi-Hong
    Chiang, Chia-Ling
    Liang, Huei-Lung
    JOURNAL OF THE CHINESE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2014, 77 (10) : 531 - 534
  • [22] Artificial Intelligence in Screening Mammography: A Population Survey of Women's Preferences
    Ongena, Yfke P.
    Yakar, Derya
    Haan, Marieke
    Kwee, Thomas C.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 18 (01) : 79 - 86
  • [23] Psychosocial factors and attendance at a population-based mammography screening program in a cohort of Swedish women
    Lagerlund, Magdalena
    Sontrop, Jessica M.
    Zackrisson, Sophia
    BMC WOMENS HEALTH, 2014, 14
  • [24] Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study
    Nederend, J.
    Duijm, L. E. M.
    Louwman, M. W. J.
    Groenewoud, J. H.
    Donkers-van Rossum, A. B.
    Voogd, A. C.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2012, 23 (12) : 3098 - 3103
  • [25] Sociodemographic Determinants of Nonattendance in a Population-Based Mammography Screening Program in the City of Manisa, Turkey
    Dundar, Pinar Erbay
    Ozyurt, Beyhan Cengiz
    Erdurak, Koray
    SCIENTIFIC WORLD JOURNAL, 2012, : 1 - 14
  • [26] Attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge as predictors of nonattendance in a Swedish population-based mammography screening program
    Lagerlund, M
    Hedin, A
    Sparén, P
    Thurfjell, E
    Lambe, M
    PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2000, 31 (04) : 417 - 428
  • [27] Psychosocial factors and attendance at a population-based mammography screening program in a cohort of Swedish women
    Magdalena Lagerlund
    Jessica M Sontrop
    Sophia Zackrisson
    BMC Women's Health, 14
  • [28] COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY IN A BREAST CANCER POPULATION-BASED SCREENING PROGRAM
    Comas, M.
    Arrospide, A.
    Mar, J.
    Roman, R.
    Sala, M.
    Hernandez, C.
    Castells, X.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2010, 13 (07) : A270 - A270
  • [29] Utilization of screening mammography as a preventive practice prior to initiating a population-based breast cancer screening program
    Segura, JM
    Castells, X
    Casamitjana, M
    Macià, F
    Ferrer, F
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 53 (06) : 595 - 603
  • [30] Factors Affecting Participation in Population-Based Mammography Screening
    Maral, Isil
    Budakoglu, Isil Irem
    Ozdemir, Ayseguel
    Bumin, Mehmet Ali
    TRAKYA UNIVERSITESI TIP FAKULTESI DERGISI, 2010, 27 (02): : 122 - 126