Artificial Intelligence-based Software for Breast Arterial Calcification Detection on Mammograms.

IF 2 Q3 ONCOLOGY Journal of Breast Imaging Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1093/jbi/wbae064
Alyssa T Watanabe, Valerie Dib, Junhao Wang, Richard Mantey, William Daughton, Chi Yung Chim, Gregory Eckel, Caroline Moss, Vinay Goel, Nitesh Nerlekar
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence-based Software for Breast Arterial Calcification Detection on Mammograms.","authors":"Alyssa T Watanabe, Valerie Dib, Junhao Wang, Richard Mantey, William Daughton, Chi Yung Chim, Gregory Eckel, Caroline Moss, Vinay Goel, Nitesh Nerlekar","doi":"10.1093/jbi/wbae064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The performance of a commercially available artificial intelligence (AI)-based software that detects breast arterial calcifications (BACs) on mammograms is presented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study was exempt from IRB approval and adhered to the HIPAA regulations. Breast arterial calcification detection using AI was assessed in 253 patients who underwent 314 digital mammography (DM) examinations and 143 patients who underwent 277 digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) examinations between October 2004 and September 2022. Artificial intelligence performance for binary BAC detection was compared with ground truth (GT) determined by the majority consensus of breast imaging radiologists. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and BAC prevalence rates of the AI algorithm were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The case-level AUCs of AI were 0.96 (0.93-0.98) for DM and 0.95 (0.92-0.98) for DBT. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 87% (79%-93%), 92% (88%-96%), and 91% (87%-94%) for DM and 88% (80%-94%), 90% (84%-94%), and 89% (85%-92%) for DBT. Positive predictive value and NPV were 82% (72%-89%) and 95% (92%-97%) for DM and 84% (76%-90%) and 92% (88%-96%) for DBT, respectively. Results are 95% confidence intervals. Breast arterial calcification prevalence was similar for both AI and GT assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Breast AI software for detection of BAC presence on mammograms showed promising performance for both DM and DBT examinations. Artificial intelligence has potential to aid radiologists in detection and reporting of BAC on mammograms, which is a known cardiovascular risk marker specific to women.</p>","PeriodicalId":43134,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Breast Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Breast Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The performance of a commercially available artificial intelligence (AI)-based software that detects breast arterial calcifications (BACs) on mammograms is presented.

Methods: This retrospective study was exempt from IRB approval and adhered to the HIPAA regulations. Breast arterial calcification detection using AI was assessed in 253 patients who underwent 314 digital mammography (DM) examinations and 143 patients who underwent 277 digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) examinations between October 2004 and September 2022. Artificial intelligence performance for binary BAC detection was compared with ground truth (GT) determined by the majority consensus of breast imaging radiologists. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and BAC prevalence rates of the AI algorithm were compared.

Results: The case-level AUCs of AI were 0.96 (0.93-0.98) for DM and 0.95 (0.92-0.98) for DBT. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 87% (79%-93%), 92% (88%-96%), and 91% (87%-94%) for DM and 88% (80%-94%), 90% (84%-94%), and 89% (85%-92%) for DBT. Positive predictive value and NPV were 82% (72%-89%) and 95% (92%-97%) for DM and 84% (76%-90%) and 92% (88%-96%) for DBT, respectively. Results are 95% confidence intervals. Breast arterial calcification prevalence was similar for both AI and GT assessments.

Conclusion: Breast AI software for detection of BAC presence on mammograms showed promising performance for both DM and DBT examinations. Artificial intelligence has potential to aid radiologists in detection and reporting of BAC on mammograms, which is a known cardiovascular risk marker specific to women.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于人工智能的乳房 X 光照片乳腺动脉钙化检测软件。
目的介绍一款基于人工智能(AI)的商用软件的性能,该软件可检测乳房X光片上的乳腺动脉钙化(BAC):这项回顾性研究免于 IRB 批准,并遵守 HIPAA 法规。2004年10月至2022年9月期间,253名患者接受了314次数字乳腺X线照相术(DM)检查,143名患者接受了277次数字乳腺断层合成术(DBT)检查。人工智能的二元 BAC 检测性能与乳腺成像放射科医生多数共识确定的地面实况(GT)进行了比较。比较了人工智能算法的接收器工作曲线下面积(AUC)、灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值(NPV)、准确性和 BAC 患病率:DM和DBT的人工智能病例水平AUC分别为0.96(0.93-0.98)和0.95(0.92-0.98)。DM的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为87%(79%-93%)、92%(88%-96%)和91%(87%-94%),DBT的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为88%(80%-94%)、90%(84%-94%)和89%(85%-92%)。DM的阳性预测值和NPV分别为82%(72%-89%)和95%(92%-97%),DBT的阳性预测值和NPV分别为84%(76%-90%)和92%(88%-96%)。结果为 95% 的置信区间。AI和GT评估的乳腺动脉钙化发生率相似:乳腺人工智能软件可检测乳房X光片上是否存在BAC,在DM和DBT检查中均表现出良好的性能。人工智能有可能帮助放射科医生检测和报告乳房 X 光照片上的 BAC,这是一种已知的女性特有的心血管风险标志物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
81
期刊最新文献
Performance of Abbreviated Breast MRI in High-Risk Patients in a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center. Developing a Career as a Clinician-Educator in Breast Imaging. Unknown Case: Non-mass Enhancement on Baseline MRI. Developing Financial Acumen as a Breast Imaging Radiologist. Methodological Considerations in Evaluating Breast Cancer Screening Studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1