下载PDF
{"title":"Impact of AI for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis on Breast Cancer Detection and Interpretation Time.","authors":"Eun Kyung Park, SooYoung Kwak, Weonsuk Lee, Joon Suk Choi, Thijs Kooi, Eun-Kyung Kim","doi":"10.1148/ryai.230318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model for the diagnosis of breast cancer on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images and to investigate whether it could improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce radiologist reading time. Materials and Methods A deep learning AI algorithm was developed and validated for DBT with retrospectively collected examinations (January 2010 to December 2021) from 14 institutions in the United States and South Korea. A multicenter reader study was performed to compare the performance of 15 radiologists (seven breast specialists, eight general radiologists) in interpreting DBT examinations in 258 women (mean age, 56 years ± 13.41 [SD]), including 65 cancer cases, with and without the use of AI. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and reading time were evaluated. Results The AUC for stand-alone AI performance was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.94). With AI, radiologists' AUC improved from 0.90 (95% CI: 0.86, 0.93) to 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96) (<i>P</i> = .003) in the reader study. AI showed higher specificity (89.64% [95% CI: 85.34%, 93.94%]) than radiologists (77.34% [95% CI: 75.82%, 78.87%]) (<i>P</i> < .001). When reading with AI, radiologists' sensitivity increased from 85.44% (95% CI: 83.22%, 87.65%) to 87.69% (95% CI: 85.63%, 89.75%) (<i>P</i> = .04), with no evidence of a difference in specificity. Reading time decreased from 54.41 seconds (95% CI: 52.56, 56.27) without AI to 48.52 seconds (95% CI: 46.79, 50.25) with AI (<i>P</i> < .001). Interreader agreement measured by Fleiss κ increased from 0.59 to 0.62. Conclusion The AI model showed better diagnostic accuracy than radiologists in breast cancer detection, as well as reduced reading times. The concurrent use of AI in DBT interpretation could improve both accuracy and efficiency. <b>Keywords:</b> Breast, Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD), Tomosynthesis, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Breast Cancer, Computer-Aided Detection, Screening <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> © RSNA, 2024 See also the commentary by Bae in this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":29787,"journal":{"name":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11140510/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.230318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
引用
批量引用
Abstract
Purpose To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model for the diagnosis of breast cancer on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images and to investigate whether it could improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce radiologist reading time. Materials and Methods A deep learning AI algorithm was developed and validated for DBT with retrospectively collected examinations (January 2010 to December 2021) from 14 institutions in the United States and South Korea. A multicenter reader study was performed to compare the performance of 15 radiologists (seven breast specialists, eight general radiologists) in interpreting DBT examinations in 258 women (mean age, 56 years ± 13.41 [SD]), including 65 cancer cases, with and without the use of AI. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and reading time were evaluated. Results The AUC for stand-alone AI performance was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.94). With AI, radiologists' AUC improved from 0.90 (95% CI: 0.86, 0.93) to 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96) (P = .003) in the reader study. AI showed higher specificity (89.64% [95% CI: 85.34%, 93.94%]) than radiologists (77.34% [95% CI: 75.82%, 78.87%]) (P < .001). When reading with AI, radiologists' sensitivity increased from 85.44% (95% CI: 83.22%, 87.65%) to 87.69% (95% CI: 85.63%, 89.75%) (P = .04), with no evidence of a difference in specificity. Reading time decreased from 54.41 seconds (95% CI: 52.56, 56.27) without AI to 48.52 seconds (95% CI: 46.79, 50.25) with AI (P < .001). Interreader agreement measured by Fleiss κ increased from 0.59 to 0.62. Conclusion The AI model showed better diagnostic accuracy than radiologists in breast cancer detection, as well as reduced reading times. The concurrent use of AI in DBT interpretation could improve both accuracy and efficiency. Keywords: Breast, Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD), Tomosynthesis, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Breast Cancer, Computer-Aided Detection, Screening Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2024 See also the commentary by Bae in this issue.
数字乳腺断层合成的人工智能对乳腺癌检测和判读时间的影响。
"刚刚接受 "的论文经过同行评审,已被接受在《放射学》上发表:人工智能》上发表。这篇文章在以最终版本发表之前,还将经过校对、排版和校对审核。请注意,在制作最终校对稿的过程中,可能会发现影响内容的错误。目的 开发一种用于数字乳腺断层扫描(DBT)中乳腺癌诊断的人工智能(AI),并研究它是否能提高诊断准确性并减少放射科医生的阅读时间。材料与方法 针对 DBT 开发了深度学习人工智能算法,并通过回顾性收集美国和韩国 14 家机构的检查结果(2010 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月)进行了验证。我们进行了一项多中心、读者研究,比较了 15 位放射科医生(7 位乳腺专家,8 位普通放射科医生)在解读 258 位女性(平均 56 岁 ± 13.41 [SD])(包括 65 例癌症病例)的 DBT 检查结果时,使用和未使用人工智能的表现。对接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)、灵敏度、特异性和读片时间进行了评估。结果 独立人工智能性能的 AUC 为 0.93(95% CI:0.92,0.94)。在读者研究中,使用人工智能后,放射医师的 AUC 从 0.90 (0.86, 0.93) 提高到 0.92 (0.88, 0.96; P = .003)。人工智能的特异性(89.64% (85.34, 93.94))高于放射科医生(77.34% (75.82, 78.87; P < .001))。使用 AI 进行读片时,放射科医生的灵敏度从 85.44% (83.22, 87.65) 提高到 87.69% (85.63, 89.75; P = .04),但特异性没有差异。阅读时间从无人工智能时的 54.41 秒(52.56, 56.27)减少到有人工智能时的 48.52 秒(46.79, 50.25)(P < .001)。用弗莱斯卡帕(Fleiss kappa)测量的读数间一致性分别从 0.59 上升到 0.62。结论 在乳腺癌检测方面,人工智能模型比放射科医生显示出更高的诊断准确性,并缩短了读片时间。在 DBT 解释中同时使用人工智能可以提高准确性和效率。©RSNA,2024。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。