AI-enhanced Mammography With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Detection: Clinical Value and Comparison With Human Performance

Purpose To compare two deep learning-based commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) systems for mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and benchmark them against the performance of radiologists. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included consecutive asymptomatic patients who underwent mammography with DBT (2019-2020). Two AI systems (Transpara 1.7.0 and ProFound AI 3.0) were used to evaluate the DBT examinations. The systems were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to calculate the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for detecting malignancy overall and within subgroups based on mammographic breast density. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System results obtained from standard-of-care human double-reading were compared against AI results with use of the DeLong test. Results Of 419 female patients (median age, 60 years [IQR, 52-70 years]) included, 58 had histologically proven breast cancer. The AUC was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.91), 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.95), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99) for Transpara, ProFound AI, and human double-reading, respectively. For Transpara, a rule-out criterion of score 7 or lower yielded 100% (95% CI: 94.2, 100.0) sensitivity and 60.9% (95% CI: 55.7, 66.0) specificity. The rule-in criterion of higher than score 9 yielded 96.6% sensitivity (95% CI: 88.1, 99.6) and 78.1% specificity (95% CI: 73.8, 82.5). For ProFound AI, a rule-out criterion of lower than score 51 yielded 100% sensitivity (95% CI: 93.8, 100) and 67.0% specificity (95% CI: 62.2, 72.1). The rule-in criterion of higher than score 69 yielded 93.1% (95% CI: 83.3, 98.1) sensitivity and 82.0% (95% CI: 77.9, 86.1) specificity. Conclusion Both AI systems showed high performance in breast cancer detection but lower performance compared with human double-reading. Keywords: Mammography, Breast, Oncology, Artificial Intelligence, Deep Learning, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis © RSNA, 2024.

Revolutionizing Breast Cancer Detection With Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Radiology and Radiation Oncology: A Systematic Review

The number one cause of cancer in women worldwide is breast cancer. Over the last three decades, the use of traditional screen-film mammography has increased, but in recent years, digital mammography and 3D tomosynthesis have become standard procedures for breast cancer screening. With the advancement of technology, the interpretation of images using automated algorithms has become a subject of interest. Initially, computer-aided detection (CAD) was introduced; however, it did not show any long-term benefit in clinical practice. With recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) methods, these technologies are showing promising potential for more accurate and efficient automated breast cancer detection and treatment. While AI promises widespread integration in breast cancer detection and treatment, challenges such as data quality, regulatory, ethical implications, and algorithm validation are crucial. Addressing these is essential for fully realizing AI's potential in enhancing early diagnosis and improving patient outcomes in breast cancer management. In this review article, we aim to provide an overview of the latest developments and applications of AI in breast cancer screening and treatment. While the existing literature primarily consists of retrospective studies, ongoing and future prospective research is poised to offer deeper insights. Artificial intelligence is on the verge of widespread integration into breast cancer detection and treatment, holding the potential to enhance early diagnosis and improve patient outcomes.

Can Artificial Intelligence Beat Humans in Detecting Breast Malignancy on Mammograms?

BACKGROUND

The study was aimed at identifying how useful Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) could be in reducing false-negative reporting in mammography and early detection of breast cancer at an early stage as the best protection is early detection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in a tertiary care setup of Atomic Energy Cancer Hospital, Nuclear Medicine, Oncology and Radiotherapy Institute (AECH-NORI), where 33 patients with suspicious findings on mammography and subsequent biopsy-proven malignancy were included. The findings of mammography including the lesion type, breast parenchymal density, and sensitivity of CAD detection, as well as the final biopsy results, were recorded. A second group of 40 normal screening mammograms was also included who had no symptoms, had Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System category I(BI-RADS I) mammograms, and had no pathology identified on correlative sonomammography as well.

RESULTS

A total of 35 masses, 11 pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification, five clustered foci of macrocalcification, and nine lesions with pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification and two with pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification only were included. The CAD system was able to identify 26 masses (74%), eight lesions with pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification (72%), five foci of macrocalcification (100%), six lesions with pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification (66%), and two pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification without formed mass (100%). The overall sensitivity of the CAD system was 75.8%. CAD was able to identify 13 out of 16 masses with invasive ductal carcinoma (81.3%), eight out of nine lesions proven as invasive ductal carcinoma with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (88.9%), two out of five masses with invasive lobular carcinoma (40%), four out of four masses with invasive mammary carcinoma (100%), and zero out of one lesion identified as medullary carcinoma (0%). There was 100% detection for pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification without formed mass with CAD marking two out of two mammograms.

CONCLUSION

CAD performed better with combined lesions, accurately marked pleomorphic clusters of microcalcification, and identified small lesions in predominant fibrofatty parenchymal density but was not reliable in dense breast, areas of asymmetric increased density, summation artifacts, edematous breast parenchyma, and retroareolar lesions. It also performed poorly with ill-defined lesions of invasive lobular carcinoma. Human intelligence hence beats CAD for the diagnosis of breast malignancy in mammograms as per our experience.

Artificial-intelligence-enhanced synthetic thick slabs versus standard slices in digital breast tomosynthesis

OBJECTIVES

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) can provide additional information over mammography, albeit at the cost of prolonged reading time. This study retrospectively investigated the impact of reading enhanced synthetic 6 mm slabs instead of standard 1 mm slices on interpretation time and readers performance in a diagnostic assessment centre.

METHODS

Three radiologists (R1-3; 6/4/2 years of breast imaging experience) reviewed 111 diagnostic DBT examinations. Two datasets were interpreted independently for each patient, with one set containing artificial-intelligence-enhanced synthetic 6 mm slabs with 3 mm overlap, while the other set comprised standard 1 mm slices. Blinded to histology and follow-up, readers noted individual BIRADS categories and diagnostic confidence while reading time was recorded. Among the 111 examinations, 70 findings were histopathologically correlated including 56 malignancies.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between BIRADS categories assigned based on 6 mm vs 1 mm datasets (p ≥ 0.317). Diagnostic accuracy was comparable for 6 mm and 1 mm readings (R1: 87.0% vs 87.0%; R2: 86.1% vs 87.0%; R3: 80.0% vs 84.4%; p ≥ 0.125) with high interrater agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.848 vs 0.865). One reader reported higher confidence with 1 mm slices (R1: p = 0.033). Reading time was substantially shorter when interpreting 6 mm slabs compared to 1 mm slices (R1: 33.5 vs 46.2; R2: 49.1 vs 64.8; R3: 39.5 vs 67.2 sec; all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial-intelligence-enhanced synthetic 6 mm slabs allow for substantial interpretation time reduction in diagnostic DBT without a decrease in reader accuracy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

A simplified slab-only protocol instead of 1 mm slices may offset the higher reading time without a loss of diagnosis-relevant image information in first and second readings. Further evaluations are required regarding workflow implications, particularly in screening settings.

Comparisons between artificial intelligence computer-aided detection synthesized mammograms and digital mammograms when used alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images in a virtual screening setting

PURPOSE

To compare the reader performance of artificial intelligence computer-aided detection synthesized mammograms (AI CAD SM) with that of digital mammograms (DM) when used alone or in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective multireader (n = 4) study compared the reader performances in 388 cases (84 cancer, 83 benign, and 221 normal or benign cases). The overall accuracy of the breast-based assessment was determined by four radiologists using two sequential reading modes: DM followed by DM + DBT; and AI CAD SM followed by AI CAD SM + DBT. Each breast was rated by each reader using five-category ratings, where 3 or higher was considered positive. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and reading time were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean AUC values for DM, AI CAD SM, DM + DBT, and AI CAD SM + DBT were 0.863, 0.895, 0.886, and 0.902, respectively. The mean AUC of AI CAD SM was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) than that of DM. The mean AUC of AI CAD SM + DBT was higher than that of DM + DBT (P = 0.094). A significant reduction in the reading time was observed after using AI CAD SM + DBT when compared with that after using DM + DBT (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

AI CAD SM + DBT might prove more effective than DM + DBT in a screening setting because of its lower radiation dose, noninferiority, and shorter reading time compared to DM + DBT.

Artificial intelligence computer-aided detection enhances synthesized mammograms: comparison with original digital mammograms alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images in an experimental setting

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether original full-field digital mammograms (DMs) can be replaced with synthesized mammograms in both screening and diagnostic settings. To compare reader performance of artificial intelligence computer-aided detection synthesized mammograms (AI CAD SMs) with that of DM alone or in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images in an experimental setting.

METHODS

We compared the performance of multireader (n = 4) and reading multicase (n = 388), in 84 cancers, 83 biopsy-proven benign lesions, and 221 normal or benign cases with negative results after 1-year follow-up. Each reading was independently interpreted with four reading modes: DM, AI CAD SM, DM + DBT, and AI CAD SM + DBT. The accuracy of probability of malignancy (POM) and five-category ratings were evaluated using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in the random-reader analysis.

RESULTS

The mean AUC values based on POM for DM, AI CAD SM, DM + DBT, and AI CAD SM + DBT were 0.871, 0.902, 0.895, and 0.909, respectively. The mean AUC of AI CAD SM was significantly higher (P = 0.002) than that of DM. For calcification lesions, the sensitivity of SM and DM did not differ significantly (P = 0.204). The mean AUC for AI CAD SM + DBT was higher than that of DM + DBT (P = 0.082). ROC curves based on the five-category ratings showed similar proximity of the overall performance levels.

CONCLUSIONS

AI CAD SM alone was superior to DM alone. Also, AI CAD SM + DBT was superior to DM + DBT but not statistically significant.

Artificial intelligence for digital breast tomosynthesis: Impact on diagnostic performance, reading times, and workload in the era of personalized screening

The ultimate goals of the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) are the reduction of reading times, the increase of diagnostic performance, and the reduction of interval cancer rates. In this review, after outlining the journey from computer-aided detection/diagnosis systems to AI applied to digital mammography (DM), we summarize the results of studies where AI was applied to DBT, noting that long-term advantages of DBT screening and its crucial ability to decrease the interval cancer rate are still under scrutiny. AI has shown the capability to overcome some shortcomings of DBT in the screening setting by improving diagnostic performance and by reducing recall rates (from -2 % to -27 %) and reading times (up to -53 %, with an average 20 % reduction), but the ability of AI to reduce interval cancer rates has not yet been clearly investigated. Prospective validation is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness and real-world impact of AI models assisting DBT interpretation, especially in large-scale studies with low breast cancer prevalence. Finally, we focus on the incoming era of personalized and risk-stratified screening that will first see the application of contrast-enhanced breast imaging to screen women with extremely dense breasts. As the diagnostic advantage of DBT over DM was concentrated in this category, we try to understand if the application of AI to DM in the remaining cohorts of women with heterogeneously dense or non-dense breast could close the gap in diagnostic performance between DM and DBT, thus neutralizing the usefulness of AI application to DBT.

Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of different reading strategies implementing artificial intelligence

Objectives

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) can detect more cancers than the current standard breast screening method, digital mammography (DM); however, it can substantially increase the reading workload and thus hinder implementation in screening. Artificial intelligence (AI) might be a solution. The aim of this study was to retrospectively test different ways of using AI in a screening workflow.

Methods

An AI system was used to analyse 14,772 double-read single-view DBT examinations from a screening trial with paired DM double reading. Three scenarios were studied: if AI can identify normal cases that can be excluded from human reading; if AI can replace the second reader; if AI can replace both readers. The number of detected cancers and false positives was compared with DM or DBT double reading.

Results

By excluding normal cases and only reading 50.5% (7460/14,772) of all examinations, 95% (121/127) of the DBT double reading detected cancers could be detected. Compared to DM screening, 27% (26/95) more cancers could be detected (p < 0.001) while keeping recall rates at the same level. With AI replacing the second reader, 95% (120/127) of the DBT double reading detected cancers could be detected—26% (25/95) more than DM screening (p < 0.001)—while increasing recall rates by 53%. AI alone with DBT has a sensitivity similar to DM double reading (p = 0.689).

Conclusion

AI can open up possibilities for implementing DBT screening and detecting more cancers with the total reading workload unchanged. Considering the potential legal and psychological implications, replacing the second reader with AI would probably be most the feasible approach.

Key Points

• Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis and artificial intelligence can detect more cancers than mammography screening without increasing screen-reading workload.

• Artificial intelligence can either exclude low-risk cases from double reading or replace the second reader.

• Retrospective study based on paired mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis screening data.

Depiction of breast cancers on digital mammograms by artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis according to cancer characteristics

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how breast cancers are depicted by artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis (AI-CAD) according to clinical, radiological, and pathological factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2017 to December 2017, 896 patients diagnosed with 930 breast cancers were enrolled in this retrospective study. Commercial AI-CAD was applied to digital mammograms and abnormality scores were obtained. We evaluated the abnormality score according to clinical, radiological, and pathological characteristics. False-negative results were defined by abnormality scores less than 10.

RESULTS

The median abnormality score of 930 breasts was 87.4 (range 0-99). The false-negative rate of AI-CAD was 19.4% (180/930). Cancers with an abnormality score of more than 90 showed a high proportion of palpable lesions, BI-RADS 4c and 5 lesions, cancers presenting as mass with or without microcalcifications and invasive cancers compared with low-scored cancers (all p < 0.001). False-negative cancers were more likely to develop in asymptomatic patients and extremely dense breasts and to be diagnosed as occult breast cancers and DCIS compared to detected cancers.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancers depicted with high abnormality scores by AI-CAD are associated with higher BI-RADS category, invasive pathology, and higher cancer stage.

KEY POINTS

• High-scored cancers by AI-CAD included a high proportion of BI-RADS 4c and 5 lesions, masses with or without microcalcifications, and cancers with invasive pathology. • Among invasive cancers, cancers with higher T and N stage and HER2-enriched subtype were depicted with higher abnormality scores by AI-CAD. • Cancers missed by AI-CAD tended to be in asymptomatic patients and extremely dense breasts and to be diagnosed as occult breast cancers by radiologists.

Impact of Artificial Intelligence Assistance on Chest CT Interpretation Times: A Prospective Randomized Study

BACKGROUND. Deep learning-based convolutional neural networks have enabled major advances in development of artificial intelligence (AI) software applications. Modern AI applications offer comprehensive multiorgan evaluation. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the impact of an automated AI platform integrated into clinical workflow for chest CT interpretation on radiologists' interpretation times when evaluated in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS. In this prospective single-center study, a commercial AI software solution was integrated into clinical workflow for chest CT interpretation. The software provided automated analysis of cardiac, pulmonary, and musculoskeletal findings, including labeling, segmenting, and measuring normal structures as well as detecting, labeling, and measuring abnormalities. AI-annotated images and autogenerated summary results were stored in the PACS and available to interpreting radiologists. A total of 390 patients (204 women, 186 men; mean age, 62.8 ± 13.3 [SD] years) who underwent out-patient chest CT between January 19, 2021, and January 28, 2021, were included. Scans were randomized using 1:1 allocation between AI-assisted and non-AI-assisted arms and were clinically interpreted by one of three cardiothoracic radiologists (65 scans per arm per radiologist; total of 195 scans per arm) who recorded interpretation times using a stopwatch. Findings were categorized according to review of report impressions. Interpretation times were compared between arms. RESULTS. Mean interpretation times were significantly shorter in the AI-assisted than in the non-AI-assisted arm for all three readers (289 ± 89 vs 344 ± 129 seconds, p < .001; 449 ± 110 vs 649 ± 82 seconds, p < .001; 281 ± 114 vs 348 ± 93 seconds, p = .01) and for readers combined (328 ± 122 vs 421 ± 175 seconds, p < .001). For readers combined, the mean difference was 93 seconds (95% CI, 63-123 seconds), corresponding with a 22.1% reduction in the AI-assisted arm. Mean interpretation time was also shorter in the AI-assisted arm compared with the non-AI-assisted arm for contrast-enhanced scans (83 seconds), noncontrast scans (104 seconds), negative scans (84 seconds), positive scans without significant new findings (117 seconds), and positive scans with significant new findings (92 seconds). CONCLUSION. Cardiothoracic radiologists exhibited a 22.1% reduction in chest CT interpretations times when they had access to results from an automated AI support platform during real-world clinical practice. CLINICAL IMPACT. Integration of the AI support platform into clinical workflow improved radiologist efficiency.

Automatic Classification of Simulated Breast Tomosynthesis Whole Images for the Presence of Microcalcification Clusters Using Deep CNNs

Microcalcification clusters (MCs) are among the most important biomarkers for breast cancer, especially in cases of nonpalpable lesions. The vast majority of deep learning studies on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) are focused on detecting and classifying lesions, especially soft-tissue lesions, in small regions of interest previously selected. Only about 25% of the studies are specific to MCs, and all of them are based on the classification of small preselected regions. Classifying the whole image according to the presence or absence of MCs is a difficult task due to the size of MCs and all the information present in an entire image. A completely automatic and direct classification, which receives the entire image, without prior identification of any regions, is crucial for the usefulness of these techniques in a real clinical and screening environment. The main purpose of this work is to implement and evaluate the performance of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) regarding an automatic classification of a complete DBT image for the presence or absence of MCs (without any prior identification of regions). In this work, four popular deep CNNs are trained and compared with a new architecture proposed by us. The main task of these trainings was the classification of DBT cases by absence or presence of MCs. A public database of realistic simulated data was used, and the whole DBT image was taken into account as input. DBT data were considered without and with preprocessing (to study the impact of noise reduction and contrast enhancement methods on the evaluation of MCs with CNNs). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the performance. Very promising results were achieved with a maximum AUC of 94.19% for the GoogLeNet. The second-best AUC value was obtained with a new implemented network, CNN-a, with 91.17%. This CNN had the particularity of also being the fastest, thus becoming a very interesting model to be considered in other studies. With this work, encouraging outcomes were achieved in this regard, obtaining similar results to other studies for the detection of larger lesions such as masses. Moreover, given the difficulty of visualizing the MCs, which are often spread over several slices, this work may have an important impact on the clinical analysis of DBT images.

The Economic Impact of AI on Breast Imaging

This article explores the development of computer-aided detection (CAD) and artificial or augmented intelligence (AI) for breast radiology examinations and describes the current applications of AI in breast imaging. Although radiologists in other subspecialties may be less familiar with the use of these technologies in their practices, CAD has been used in breast imaging for more than two decades, as mammography CAD programs have been commercially available in the United States since the late 1990s. Likewise, breast radiologists have seen payment for CAD in mammography and breast MRI evolve over time. With the rapid expansion of AI products in radiology in recent years, many new applications for these technologies in breast imaging have emerged. This article outlines the current state of reimbursement for breast radiology AI algorithms within the traditional fee-for-service model used by Medicare and commercial insurers as well as potential future payment pathways. In addition, the inherent challenges of employing the existing payment framework in the United States to AI programs in radiology are detailed for the reader. This article aims to give breast radiologists a better understanding of how AI will be reimbursed as they seek to further incorporate these emerging technologies into their practices to advance patient care and improve workflow efficiency.

Application of Deep Learning in Breast Cancer Imaging

This review gives an overview of the current state of deep learning research in breast cancer imaging. Breast imaging plays a major role in detecting breast cancer at an earlier stage, as well as monitoring and evaluating breast cancer during treatment. The most commonly used modalities for breast imaging are digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. Nuclear medicine imaging techniques are used for detection and classification of axillary lymph nodes and distant staging in breast cancer imaging. All of these techniques are currently digitized, enabling the possibility to implement deep learning (DL), a subset of Artificial intelligence, in breast imaging. DL is nowadays embedded in a plethora of different tasks, such as lesion classification and segmentation, image reconstruction and generation, cancer risk prediction, and prediction and assessment of therapy response. Studies show similar and even better performances of DL algorithms compared to radiologists, although it is clear that large trials are needed, especially for ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, to exactly determine the added value of DL in breast cancer imaging. Studies on DL in nuclear medicine techniques are only sparsely available and further research is mandatory. Legal and ethical issues need to be considered before the role of DL can expand to its full potential in clinical breast care practice.

Automated Segmentation of Mass Regions in DBT Images Using a Dilated DCNN Approach

To overcome the limitations of conventional breast screening methods based on digital mammography, a quasi-3D imaging technique, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has been developed in the field of breast cancer screening in recent years. In this work, a computer-aided architecture for mass regions segmentation in DBT images using a dilated deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) is developed. First, to improve the low contrast of breast tumour candidate regions and depress the background tissue noise in the DBT image effectively, the constraint matrix is established after top-hat transformation and multiplied with the DBT image. Second, input image patches are generated, and the data augmentation technique is performed to create the training data set for training a dilated DCNN architecture. Then the mass regions in DBT images are preliminarily segmented; each pixel is divided into two different kinds of labels. Finally, the postprocessing procedure removes all false-positives regions with less than 50 voxels. The final segmentation results are obtained by smoothing the boundaries of the mass regions with a median filter. The testing accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) are adopted as the evaluation metrics, and the ACC, SEN, as well as AUC are 86.3%, 85.6%, and 0.852 for segmenting the mass regions in DBT images on the entire data set, respectively. The experimental results indicate that our proposed approach achieves promising results compared with other classical CAD-based frameworks.

Can a Computer-Aided Mass Diagnosis Model Based on Perceptive Features Learned From Quantitative Mammography Radiology Reports Improve Junior Radiologists' Diagnosis Performance? An Observer Study

Radiologists' diagnostic capabilities for breast mass lesions depend on their experience. Junior radiologists may underestimate or overestimate Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories of mass lesions owing to a lack of diagnostic experience. The computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) method assists in improving diagnostic performance by providing a breast mass classification reference to radiologists. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a CAD method based on perceptive features learned from quantitative BI-RADS descriptions on breast mass diagnosis performance. We conducted a retrospective multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) study to assess the perceptive feature-based CAD method. A total of 416 digital mammograms of patients with breast masses were obtained from 2014 through 2017, including 231 benign and 185 malignant masses, from which we randomly selected 214 cases (109 benign, 105 malignant) to train the CAD model for perceptive feature extraction and classification. The remaining 202 cases were enrolled as the test set for evaluation, of which 51 patients (29 benign and 22 malignant) participated in the MRMC study. In the MRMC study, we categorized six radiologists into three groups: junior, middle-senior, and senior. They diagnosed 51 patients with and without support from the CAD model. The BI-RADS category, benign or malignant diagnosis, malignancy probability, and diagnosis time during the two evaluation sessions were recorded. In the MRMC evaluation, the average area under the curve (AUC) of the six radiologists with CAD support was slightly higher than that without support (0.896 vs. 0.850, p = 0.0209). Both average sensitivity and specificity increased (p = 0.0253). Under CAD assistance, junior and middle-senior radiologists adjusted the assessment categories of more BI-RADS 4 cases. The diagnosis time with and without CAD support was comparable for five radiologists. The CAD model improved the radiologists' diagnostic performance for breast masses without prolonging the diagnosis time and assisted in a better BI-RADS assessment, especially for junior radiologists.

Impact of Artificial Intelligence Decision Support Using Deep Learning on Breast Cancer Screening Interpretation with Single-View Wide-Angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Background The high volume of data in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and the lack of agreement on how to best implement it in screening programs makes its use challenging. Purpose To compare radiologist performance when reading single-view wide-angle DBT images with and without an artificial intelligence (AI) system for decision and navigation support. Materials and Methods A retrospective observer study was performed with bilateral mediolateral oblique examinations and corresponding synthetic two-dimensional images acquired between June 2016 and February 2018 with a wide-angle DBT system. Fourteen breast screening radiologists interpreted 190 DBT examinations (90 normal, 26 with benign findings, and 74 with malignant findings), with the reference standard being verified by using histopathologic analysis or at least 1 year of follow-up. Reading was performed in two sessions, separated by at least 4 weeks, with a random mix of examinations being read with and without AI decision and navigation support. Forced Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (categories 1-5) and level of suspicion (1-100) scores were given per breast by each reader. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the sensitivity and specificity were compared between conditions by using the public-domain iMRMC software. The average reading times were compared by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results The 190 women had a median age of 54 years (range, 48-63 years). The examination-based reader-averaged AUC was higher when interpreting results with AI support than when reading unaided (0.88 [95% CI: 0.84, 0.92] vs 0.85 [95% CI: 0.80, 0.89], respectively; P = .01). The average sensitivity increased with AI support (64 of 74, 86% [95% CI: 80%, 92%] vs 60 of 74, 81% [95% CI: 74%, 88%]; P = .006), whereas no differences in the specificity (85 of 116, 73.3% [95% CI: 65%, 81%] vs 83 of 116, 71.6% [95% CI: 65%, 78%]; P = .48) or reading time (48 seconds vs 45 seconds; P = .35) were detected. Conclusion Using a single-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and artificial intelligence setup could allow for a more effective screening program with higher performance, especially in terms of an increase in cancers detected, than using single-view DBT alone. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chan and Helvie in this issue.

Performance and reading time of lung nodule identification on multidetector CT with or without an artificial intelligence-powered computer-aided detection system

AIM

To compare the performance and reading time of different readers using automatic artificial intelligence (AI)-powered computer-aided detection (CAD) to detect lung nodules in different reading modes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifty multidetector computed tomography (CT) datasets containing 340 nodules ≤10 mm in diameter were collected retrospectively. A CAD with vessel-suppressed function was used to interpret the images. Three junior and three senior readers were assigned to read (1) CT images without CAD, (2) second-read using CAD in which CAD was applied only after initial unassisted assessment, and (3) a concurrent read with CAD in which CAD was applied at the start of assessment. Diagnostic performances and reading times were compared using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

For all readers, the mean sensitivity improved from 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62%, 66%) for the without-CAD mode to 82% (95% CI: 80%, 84%) for the second-reading mode and to 80% (95% CI: 79%, 82%) for the concurrent-reading mode (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two modes in terms of the mean sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for both junior and senior readers and all readers (p>0.05). The reading time of all readers was significantly shorter for the concurrent-reading mode (124 ± 25 seconds) compared to without CAD (156 ± 34 seconds; p<0.001) and the second-reading mode (197 ± 46 seconds; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In CAD for lung nodules at CT, the second-reading mode and concurrent-reading mode may improve detection performance for all readers in both screening and clinical routine practice. Concurrent use of CAD is more efficient for both junior and senior readers.

Deep Learning-Based Artificial Intelligence for Mammography

During the past decade, researchers have investigated the use of computer-aided mammography interpretation. With the application of deep learning technology, artificial intelligence (AI)-based algorithms for mammography have shown promising results in the quantitative assessment of parenchymal density, detection and diagnosis of breast cancer, and prediction of breast cancer risk, enabling more precise patient management. AI-based algorithms may also enhance the efficiency of the interpretation workflow by reducing both the workload and interpretation time. However, more in-depth investigation is required to conclusively prove the effectiveness of AI-based algorithms. This review article discusses how AI algorithms can be applied to mammography interpretation as well as the current challenges in its implementation in real-world practice.

Applying deep learning in digital breast tomosynthesis for automatic breast cancer detection: A review

The relatively recent reintroduction of deep learning has been a revolutionary force in the interpretation of diagnostic imaging studies. However, the technology used to acquire those images is undergoing a revolution itself at the very same time. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is one such technology, which has transformed the field of breast imaging. DBT, a form of three-dimensional mammography, is rapidly replacing the traditional two-dimensional mammograms. These parallel developments in both the acquisition and interpretation of breast images present a unique case study in how modern AI systems can be designed to adapt to new imaging methods. They also present a unique opportunity for co-development of both technologies that can better improve the validity of results and patient outcomes. In this review, we explore the ways in which deep learning can be best integrated into breast cancer screening workflows using DBT. We first explain the principles behind DBT itself and why it has become the gold standard in breast screening. We then survey the foundations of deep learning methods in diagnostic imaging, and review the current state of research into AI-based DBT interpretation. Finally, we present some of the limitations of integrating AI into clinical practice and the opportunities these present in this burgeoning field.

Comparison of Narrow-angle and Wide-angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Systems in Clinical Practice

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a pseudo 3D mammography imaging technique that has become widespread since gaining Food and Drug Administration approval in 2011. With this technology, a variable number of tomosynthesis projection images are obtained over an angular range between 15° and 50° for currently available clinical DBT systems. The angular range impacts various aspects of clinical imaging, such as radiation dose, scan time, and image quality, including visualization of calcifications, masses, and architectural distortion. This review presents an overview of the differences between narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems, with an emphasis on their applications in clinical practice. Comparison examples of patients imaged on both narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems illustrate these differences. Understanding the potential variable appearance of imaging findings with narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems is important for radiologists, particularly when comparison images have been obtained on a different DBT system. Furthermore, knowledge about the comparative strengths and limitations of DBT systems is needed for appropriate equipment selection.

Application of artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis on synthetic mammograms from breast tomosynthesis: comparison with digital mammograms

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic agreement and performances of synthetic and conventional mammograms when artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis (AI-CAD) is applied.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

From January 2017 to April 2017, 192 patients (mean age 53.7 ± 11.7 years) diagnosed with 203 breast cancers were enrolled in this retrospective study. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with digital mammograms (DM) simultaneously. Commercial AI-CAD was applied to the reconstructed synthetic mammograms (SM) from DBT and DM respectively and abnormality scores were calculated. We compared the median abnormality scores between DM and SM with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and used the Bland-Altman analysis to evaluate agreements between the two mammograms and to investigate clinicopathological factors which might affect agreement. Diagnostic performances were compared using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULT

The abnormality scores showed a mean difference (bias) of - 3.26 (95% limits of agreement: - 32.69, 26.18) between the two mammograms by the Bland-Altman analysis. The concordance correlation coefficient was 0.934 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.946), suggesting high reproducibility. SM showed higher abnormality scores in cancer with distortion and occult findings, T1 and N0 cancer, and luminal type cancer than DM (all p ≤ 0.001). Diagnostic performance did not differ between the mammograms (AUC 0.945 for conventional mammograms, 0.938 for synthetic mammograms, p = 0.499).

CONCLUSION

AI-CAD can also work well on synthetic mammograms, showing good agreement and comparable diagnostic performance compared to its application to DM.

KEY POINTS

• AI-CAD which was developed based on imaging findings of digital mammograms can also be applied to synthetic mammograms. • AI-CAD showed good agreement and similar diagnostic performance when applied to both synthetic and digital mammograms. • With AI-CAD, synthetic mammograms showed relatively higher abnormality scores in cancer with distortion and occult findings, T1 and N0 cancer, and luminal type cancer than digital mammograms.

Are artificial intelligence systems useful in breast cancer screening programs?

Population-based breast cancer screening programs are efficacious in reducing the mortality due to breast cancer. These programs use mammography to screen the women who are invited to participate. Digital mammography makes it possible to develop computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) systems that promise to reduce the workload of radiologists participating in screening programs. However, various studies have shown that CAD results in a high rate of false positive diagnoses. Systems based on artificial intelligence are being more widely implemented, and studies have shown that these systems have better diagnostic performance than traditional CAD systems. This article explains the fundamentals of artificial intelligence systems and an overview of possible applications of these systems within the framework of breast cancer screening programs.

Deep learning in breast radiology: current progress and future directions

This review provides an overview of current applications of deep learning methods within breast radiology. The diagnostic capabilities of deep learning in breast radiology continue to improve, giving rise to the prospect that these methods may be integrated not only into detection and classification of breast lesions, but also into areas such as risk estimation and prediction of tumor responses to therapy. Remaining challenges include limited availability of high-quality data with expert annotations and ground truth determinations, the need for further validation of initial results, and unresolved medicolegal considerations. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning (DL) continues to push the boundaries of what can be accomplished by artificial intelligence (AI) in breast imaging with distinct advantages over conventional computer-aided detection. • DL-based AI has the potential to augment the capabilities of breast radiologists by improving diagnostic accuracy, increasing efficiency, and supporting clinical decision-making through prediction of prognosis and therapeutic response. • Remaining challenges to DL implementation include a paucity of prospective data on DL utilization and yet unresolved medicolegal questions regarding increasing AI utilization.

An Enhanced Visualization of DBT Imaging Using Blind Deconvolution and Total Variation Minimization Regularization

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) presents out-of-plane artifacts caused by features of high intensity. Given observed data and knowledge about the point spread function (PSF), deconvolution techniques recover data from a blurred version. However, a correct PSF is difficult to achieve and these methods amplify noise. When no information is available about the PSF, blind deconvolution can be used. Additionally, Total Variation (TV) minimization algorithms have achieved great success due to its virtue of preserving edges while reducing image noise. This work presents a novel approach in DBT through the study of out-of-plane artifacts using blind deconvolution and noise regularization based on TV minimization. Gradient information was also included. The methodology was tested using real phantom data and one clinical data set. The results were investigated using conventional 2D slice-by-slice visualization and 3D volume rendering. For the 2D analysis, the artifact spread function (ASF) and Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHMM_ASF) of the ASF were considered. The 3D quantitative analysis was based on the FWHM of disks profiles at 90°, noise and signal to noise ratio (SNR) at 0° and 90°. A marked visual decrease of the artifact with reductions of FWHM_ASF (2D) and FWHM_90° (volume rendering) of 23.8% and 23.6%, respectively, was observed. Although there was an expected increase in noise level, SNR values were preserved after deconvolution. Regardless of the methodology and visualization approach, the objective of reducing the out-of-plane artifact was accomplished. Both for the phantom and clinical case, the artifact reduction in the z was markedly visible.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Slab Thickness: Impact on Reader Performance and Interpretation Time

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) helps reduce recall rates and improve cancer detection compared with two-dimensional (2D) mammography but has a longer interpretation time. Purpose To evaluate the effect of DBT slab thickness and overlap on reader performance and interpretation time in the absence of 1-mm slices. Materials and Methods In this retrospective HIPAA-compliant multireader study of DBT examinations performed between August 2013 and July 2017, four fellowship-trained breast imaging radiologists blinded to final histologic findings interpreted DBT examinations by using a standard protocol (10-mm slabs with 5-mm overlap, 1-mm slices, synthetic 2D mammogram) and an experimental protocol (6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, synthetic 2D mammogram) with a crossover design. Among the 122 DBT examinations, 74 mammographic findings had final histologic findings, including 31 masses (26 malignant), 20 groups of calcifications (12 malignant), 18 architectural distortions (15 malignant), and five asymmetries (two malignant). Durations of reader interpretations were recorded. Comparisons were made by using receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnostic performance and paired t tests for continuous variables. Results Among 122 women, mean age was 58.6 years ± 10.1 (standard deviation). For detection of malignancy, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were similar between protocols (range, 0.83-0.94 vs 0.84-0.92; P ≥ .63). Mean DBT interpretation time was shorter with the experimental protocol for three of four readers (reader 1, 5.6 minutes ± 1.7 vs 4.7 minutes ± 1.4 [P < .001]; reader 2, 2.8 minutes ± 1.1 vs 2.3 minutes ± 1.0 [P = .001]; reader 3, 3.6 minutes ± 1.4 vs 3.3 minutes ± 1.3 [P = .17]; reader 4, 4.3 minutes ± 1.0 vs 3.8 minutes ± 1.1 [P ≤ .001]), with 72% reduction in both mean number of images and mean file size (P < .001 for both). Conclusion A digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction protocol that uses 6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, without 1-mm slices, had similar diagnostic performance compared with the standard protocol and led to a reduced interpretation time for three of four readers. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

Impact of total variation minimization in volume rendering visualization of breast tomosynthesis data

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Total Variation (TV) minimization algorithms have achieved great attention due to the virtue of decreasing noise while preserving edges. The purpose of this work is to implement and evaluate two TV minimization methods in 3D. Their performance is analyzed through 3D visualization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) data with volume rendering.

METHODS

Both filters were studied with real phantom and one clinical DBT data. One algorithm was applied sequentially to all slices and the other was applied to the entire volume at once. The suitable Lagrange multiplier used in each filter equation was studied to reach the minimum 3D TV and the maximum contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Imaging blur was measured at 0° and 90° using two disks with different diameters (0.5 mm and 5.0 mm) and equal thickness. The quality of unfiltered and filtered data was analyzed with volume rendering at 0° and 90°.

RESULTS

For phantom data, with the sequential filter, a decrease of 25% in 3D TV value and an increase of 19% and 30% in CNR at 0° and 90°, respectively, were observed. When the filter is applied directly in 3D, TV value was reduced by 35% and an increase of 36% was achieved both for CNR at 0° and 90°. For the smaller disk, variations of 0% in width at half maximum (FWHM) at 0° and a decrease of about 2.5% for FWHM at 90° were observed for both filters. For the larger disk, there was a 2.5% increase in FWHM at 0° for both filters and a decrease of 6.28% and 1.69% in FWHM at 90° with the sequential filter and the 3D filter, respectively. When applied to clinical data, the performance of each filter was consistent with that obtained with the phantom.

CONCLUSIONS

Data analysis confirmed the relevance of these methods in improving quality of DBT images. Additionally, this type of 3D visualization showed that it may play an important complementary role in DBT imaging. It allows to visualize all DBT data at once and to analyze properly filters applied to all the three dimensions. Concise Abstract Total Variation (TV) minimization algorithms are one compressed sensing technique that has achieved great attention due to the virtue of decrease noise while preserve edges transitions. The purpose of this work is to solve the same TV minimization problem in DBT data, by studying two 3D filters. The obtained results were analyzed at 0° and 90° with a 3D visualization through volume rendering. The filters differ in their application. One considers a slice-by-slice optimization, sequentially traversing all slices of the data. The other considers the intensity values of adjacent slices to make this optimization on each voxel. The performance of each filter was also tested with a clinical case. The results obtained were very encouraging with a significantly increased contrast to noise ratio at 0° and 90° and a small reduction in blur at 90° (slight reduction of the out-of-plane artifact).

A review on methods for diagnosis of breast cancer cells and tissues

Breast cancer has seriously been threatening physical and mental health of women in the world, and its morbidity and mortality also show clearly upward trend in China over time. Through inquiry, we find that survival rate of patients with early‐stage breast cancer is significantly higher than those with middle‐ and late‐stage breast cancer, hence, it is essential to conduct research to quickly diagnose breast cancer. Until now, many methods for diagnosing breast cancer have been developed, mainly based on imaging and molecular biotechnology examination. These methods have great contributions in screening and confirmation of breast cancer. In this review article, we introduce and elaborate the advances of these methods, and then conclude some gold standard diagnostic methods for certain breast cancer patients. We lastly discuss how to choose the most suitable diagnostic methods for breast cancer patients. In general, this article not only summarizes application and development of these diagnostic methods, but also provides the guidance for researchers who work on diagnosis of breast cancer.

Artificial intelligence for breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: State of the art

Screening for breast cancer with mammography has been introduced in various countries over the last 30 years, initially using analog screen-film-based systems and, over the last 20 years, transitioning to the use of fully digital systems. With the introduction of digitization, the computer interpretation of images has been a subject of intense interest, resulting in the introduction of computer-aided detection (CADe) and diagnosis (CADx) algorithms in the early 2000's. Although they were introduced with high expectations, the potential improvement in the clinical realm failed to materialize, mostly due to the high number of false positive marks per analyzed image. In the last five years, the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution in computing, driven mostly by deep learning and convolutional neural networks, has also pervaded the field of automated breast cancer detection in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis. Research in this area first involved comparison of its capabilities to that of conventional CADe/CADx methods, which quickly demonstrated the potential of this new technology. In the last couple of years, more mature and some commercial products have been developed, and studies of their performance compared to that of experienced breast radiologists are showing that these algorithms are on par with human-performance levels in retrospective data sets. Although additional studies, especially prospective evaluations performed in the real screening environment, are needed, it is becoming clear that AI will have an important role in the future breast cancer screening realm. Exactly how this new player will shape this field remains to be determined, but recent studies are already evaluating different options for implementation of this technology. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the basic concepts and developments in the field AI for breast cancer detection in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis. The pitfalls of conventional methods, and how these are, for the most part, avoided by this new technology, will be discussed. Importantly, studies that have evaluated the current capabilities of AI and proposals for how these capabilities should be leveraged in the clinical realm will be reviewed, while the questions that need to be answered before this vision becomes a reality are posed.

CANDI: an R package and Shiny app for annotating radiographs and evaluating computer-aided diagnosis

Motivation

Radiologists have used algorithms for Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD) for decades. These algorithms use machine learning with engineered features, and there have been mixed findings on whether they improve radiologists’ interpretations. Deep learning offers superior performance but requires more training data and has not been evaluated in joint algorithm-radiologist decision systems.

Results

We developed the Computer-Aided Note and Diagnosis Interface (CANDI) for collaboratively annotating radiographs and evaluating how algorithms alter human interpretation. The annotation app collects classification, segmentation, and image captioning training data, and the evaluation app randomizes the availability of CAD tools to facilitate clinical trials on radiologist enhancement.

Availability and implementation

Demonstrations and source code are hosted at (https://candi.nextgenhealthcare.org), and (https://github.com/mbadge/candi), respectively, under GPL-3 license.

Supplementary information

Supplementary material is available at Bioinformatics online.

CAD and AI for breast cancer-recent development and challenges

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been a popular area of research and development in the past few decades. In CAD, machine learning methods and multidisciplinary knowledge and techniques are used to analyze the patient information and the results can be used to assist clinicians in their decision making process. CAD may analyze imaging information alone or in combination with other clinical data. It may provide the analyzed information directly to the clinician or correlate the analyzed results with the likelihood of certain diseases based on statistical modeling of the past cases in the population. CAD systems can be developed to provide decision support for many applications in the patient care processes, such as lesion detection, characterization, cancer staging, treatment planning and response assessment, recurrence and prognosis prediction. The new state-of-the-art machine learning technique, known as deep learning (DL), has revolutionized speech and text recognition as well as computer vision. The potential of major breakthrough by DL in medical image analysis and other CAD applications for patient care has brought about unprecedented excitement of applying CAD, or artificial intelligence (AI), to medicine in general and to radiology in particular. In this paper, we will provide an overview of the recent developments of CAD using DL in breast imaging and discuss some challenges and practical issues that may impact the advancement of artificial intelligence and its integration into clinical workflow.

Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks

Purpose: Computer-aided detection (CAD) alerts radiologists to findings potentially associated with breast cancer but is notorious for creating false-positive marks. Although a previous paper found that radiologists took more time to interpret mammograms with more CAD marks, our impression was that this was not true in actual interpretation. We hypothesized that radiologists would selectively disregard these marks when present in larger numbers.

Approach: We performed a retrospective review of bilateral digital screening mammograms. We use a mixed linear regression model to assess the relationship between number of CAD marks and ln (interpretation time) after adjustment for covariates. Both readers and mammograms were treated as random sampling units.

Results: Ten radiologists, with median experience after residency of 12.5 years (range 6 to 24) interpreted 1832 mammograms. After accounting for number of images, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category, and breast density, the number of CAD marks was positively associated with longer interpretation time, with each additional CAD mark proportionally increasing median interpretation time by 4.35% for a typical reader.

Conclusions: We found no support for our hypothesis that radiologists will selectively disregard CAD marks when they are present in larger numbers.

New Frontiers: An Update on Computer-Aided Diagnosis for Breast Imaging in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to compare traditional versus machine learning-based computer-aided detection (CAD) platforms in breast imaging with a focus on mammography, to underscore limitations of traditional CAD, and to highlight potential solutions in new CAD systems under development for the future.

CONCLUSION

CAD development for breast imaging is undergoing a paradigm shift based on vast improvement of computing power and rapid emergence of advanced deep learning algorithms, heralding new systems that may hold real potential to improve clinical care.

Improving Accuracy and Efficiency with Concurrent Use of Artificial Intelligence for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Purpose

To evaluate the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to shorten digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) reading time while maintaining or improving accuracy.

Materials and Methods

A deep learning AI system was developed to identify suspicious soft-tissue and calcified lesions in DBT images. A reader study compared the performance of 24 radiologists (13 of whom were breast subspecialists) reading 260 DBT examinations (including 65 cancer cases) both with and without AI. Readings occurred in two sessions separated by at least 4 weeks. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), reading time, sensitivity, specificity, and recall rate were evaluated with statistical methods for multireader, multicase studies.

Results

Radiologist performance for the detection of malignant lesions, measured by mean AUC, increased 0.057 with the use of AI (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.028, 0.087; P < .01), from 0.795 without AI to 0.852 with AI. Reading time decreased 52.7% (95% CI: 41.8%, 61.5%; P < .01), from 64.1 seconds without to 30.4 seconds with AI. Sensitivity increased from 77.0% without AI to 85.0% with AI (8.0%; 95% CI: 2.6%, 13.4%; P < .01), specificity increased from 62.7% without to 69.6% with AI (6.9%; 95% CI: 3.0%, 10.8%; noninferiority P < .01), and recall rate for noncancers decreased from 38.0% without to 30.9% with AI (7.2%; 95% CI: 3.1%, 11.2%; noninferiority P < .01).

Conclusion

The concurrent use of an accurate DBT AI system was found to improve cancer detection efficacy in a reader study that demonstrated increases in AUC, sensitivity, and specificity and a reduction in recall rate and reading time.© RSNA, 2019See also the commentary by Hsu and Hoyt in this issue.

Computer-Aided Detection for Breast Cancer Screening in Clinical Settings: Scoping Review

Background

With the growth of machine learning applications, the practice of medicine is evolving. Computer-aided detection (CAD) is a software technology that has become widespread in radiology practices, particularly in breast cancer screening for improving detection rates at earlier stages. Many studies have investigated the diagnostic accuracy of CAD, but its implementation in clinical settings has been largely overlooked.

Objective

The aim of this scoping review was to summarize recent literature on the adoption and implementation of CAD during breast cancer screening by radiologists and to describe barriers and facilitators for CAD use.

Methods

The MEDLINE database was searched for English, peer-reviewed articles that described CAD implementation, including barriers or facilitators, in breast cancer screening and were published between January 2010 and March 2018. Articles describing the diagnostic accuracy of CAD for breast cancer detection were excluded. The search returned 526 citations, which were reviewed in duplicate through abstract and full-text screening. Reference lists and cited references in the included studies were reviewed.

Results

A total of nine articles met the inclusion criteria. The included articles showed that there is a tradeoff between the facilitators and barriers for CAD use. Facilitators for CAD use were improved breast cancer detection rates, increased profitability of breast imaging, and time saved by replacing double reading. Identified barriers were less favorable perceptions of CAD compared to double reading by radiologists, an increase in recall rates of patients for further testing, increased costs, and unclear effect on patient outcomes.

Conclusions

There is a gap in the literature between CAD’s well-established diagnostic accuracy and its implementation and use by radiologists. Generally, the perceptions of radiologists have not been considered and details of implementation approaches for adoption of CAD have not been reported. The cost-effectiveness of CAD has not been well established for breast cancer screening in various populations. Further research is needed on how to best facilitate CAD in radiology practices in order to optimize patient outcomes, and the views of radiologists need to be better considered when advancing CAD use.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Concepts and Clinical Practice

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is emerging as the standard of care for breast imaging based on improvements in both screening and diagnostic imaging outcomes. The additional information obtained from the tomosynthesis acquisition decreases the confounding effect of overlapping tissue, allowing for improved lesion detection, characterization, and localization. In addition, the quasi three-dimensional information obtained from the reconstructed DBT data set allows a more efficient imaging work-up than imaging with two-dimensional full-field digital mammography alone. Herein, the authors review the benefits of DBT imaging in screening and diagnostic breast imaging.

Performance and Reading Time of Automated Breast US with or without Computer-aided Detection

BackgroundComputer-aided detection (CAD) systems may be used to help radiologists interpret automated breast (AB) US images. However, the optimal use of CAD with AB US has, to the knowledge of the authors, not been determined.PurposeTo compare the performance and reading time of different readers by using AB US CAD system to detect breast cancer in different reading modes.Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective study, 1485 AB US images (282 with malignant lesions, 695 with benign lesions, and 508 healthy) in 1452 women (mean age, 43.7 years; age range, 19-82 years) including 529 (36.4%) women who were asymptomatic were collected between 2016 and 2017. A CAD system was used to interpret the images. Three novice readers with 1-3 years of US experience and three experienced readers with 5-10 years of US experience were assigned to read AB US images without CAD, at a second reading (after the reader completed a full unaided interpretation), and at concurrent reading (use of CAD at the start of the assessment). Diagnostic performances and reading times were compared by using analysis of variance.ResultsFor all readers, the mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85, 0.91) at without-CAD mode to 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.92; P < .001) at the second-reading mode and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.92; P = .002) at the concurrent-reading mode. The mean sensitivity of novice readers in women who were asymptomatic improved from 67% (95% CI: 63%, 74%) at without-CAD mode to 88% (95% CI: 84%, 89%) at both the second-reading mode and the concurrent-reading mode (P = .003). Compared with the without-CAD and second-reading modes, the mean reading time per volume of concurrent reading was 16 seconds (95% CI: 11, 22; P < .001) and 27 seconds (95% CI: 21, 32; P < .001) shorter, respectively.ConclusionComputer-aided detection (CAD) was helpful for novice readers to improve cancer detection at automated breast US in women who were asymptomatic. CAD was more efficient when used concurrently for all readers.© RSNA, 2019Online supplemental material is available for this article.See also the editorial by Slanetz in this issue.

Can Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Replace Full-Field Digital Mammography? A Multireader, Multicase Study of Wide-Angle Tomosynthesis

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis whether two-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) can replace full-field digital mammography (FFDM) for breast cancer detection. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. In a multireader multicase study, bilateral two-view FFDM and bilateral two-view wide-angle DBT images were independently viewed for breast cancer detection in two reading sessions separated by more than 1 month. From a pool of 764 patients undergoing screening and diagnostic mammography, 330 patient-cases were selected. The endpoints were the mean ROC AUC for the reader per breast (breast level), ROC AUC per patient (subject level), noncancer recall rates, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS. Twenty-nine of 31 readers performed better with DBT than FFDM regardless of breast density. There was a statistically significant improvement in readers' mean diagnostic accuracy with DBT. The subject-level AUC increased from 0.765 (standard error [SE], 0.027) for FFDM to 0.835 (SE, 0.027) for DBT (p = 0.002). Breast-level AUC increased from 0.818 (SE, 0.019) for FFDM to 0.861 (SE, 0.019) for DBT (p = 0.011). The noncancer recall rate per patient was reduced by 19% with DBT (p < 0.001). Masses and architectural distortions were detected more with DBT (p < 0.001); calcifications trended lower (p = 0.136). Accuracy for detection of invasive cancers was significantly greater with DBT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION. Reader performance in breast cancer detection is significantly higher with wide-angle two-view DBT independent of FFDM, verifying the robustness of DBT as a sole view. However, results of perception studies in the vision sciences support the inclusion of an overview image.

Breast tomosynthesis: state of the art

Breast tomosynthesis is a continually improving tool for diagnostic radiologists. This update about tomosynthesis reviews the advantages of the technique both in patients with suspected or known disease and in screening, as well as its limitations, of which the dose of radiation is the most important. The more recent advent of synthesized mammography, computer-assisted detection, and tomosynthesis-guided biopsy have helped to reduce the dose of radiation used and have improved the diagnostic performance of tomosynthesis, so they are also discussed in this review.

Comparing two visualization protocols for tomosynthesis in screening: specificity and sensitivity of slabs versus planes plus slabs

OBJECTIVES

Tomosynthesis (DBT) has proven to be more sensitive than digital mammography, but it requires longer reading time. We retrospectively compared accuracy and reading times of a simplified protocol with 1-cm-thick slabs versus a standard protocol of slabs + 1-mm-spaced planes, both integrated with synthetic 2D.

METHODS

We randomly selected 894 DBTs (including 12 cancers) from the experimental arm of the RETomo trial. DBTs were read by two radiologists to estimate specificity. A second set of 24 cancers (8 also present in the first set) mixed within 276 negative DBTs was read by two radiologists. In total, 28 cancers with 64 readings were used to estimate sensitivity. Radiologists read with both protocols separated by a 3-month washout. Only women that were positive at the screening reading were assessed. Variance was estimated taking into account repeated measures.

RESULTS

Sensitivity was 82.8% (53/64, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 67.2-92.2) and 90.6% (95% CI 80.2-95.8) with simplified and standard protocols, respectively. In the random screening setting, specificity was 97.9% (1727/1764, 95% CI 97.1-98.5) and 96.3% (95% CI 95.3-97.1), respectively. Inter-reader agreement was 0.68 and 0.54 with simplified and standard protocols, respectively. Median reading times with simplified protocol were 20% to 30% shorter than with standard protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

A simplified protocol reduced reading time and false positives but may have a negative impact on sensitivity.

KEY POINTS

• The adoption of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in screening, more sensitive than mammography, could be limited by its potential effect on the radiologists' workload, i.e., increased reading time and fatigue. • A DBT simplified protocol with slab only, compared to a standard protocol (slab plus planes) both integrated with synthetic 2D, reduced time and false positives but had a negative impact on sensitivity.

Decrease in interpretation time for both novice and experienced readers using a concurrent computer-aided detection system for digital breast tomosynthesis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic performance and interpretation time of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for both novice and experienced readers with and without using a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for concurrent read.

METHODS

CAD system was developed for concurrent read in DBT interpretation. In this observer performance study, we used an enriched sample of 100 DBT cases including 70 with and 30 without breast cancers. Image interpretation was performed by four radiologists with different experience levels (two experienced and two novice). Each reader completed two reading sessions (at a minimum 2-month interval), once with and once without CAD. Three different rating scales were used to record each reader's interpretation. Reader performance with and without CAD was reported and compared for each radiologist. Reading time for each case was also recorded.

RESULTS

Average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for BI-RADS scale on using CAD were 0.778 and 0.776 without using CAD, demonstrating no statistically significant differences. Results were consistent when the probability of malignancy and percentage probability of malignancy scales were used. Reading times per case were 72.07 s and 62.03 s (SD, 37.54 s vs 34.38 s) without and with CAD, respectively. The average difference in reading time on using CAD was a statistically significant decrease of 10.04 ± 1.85 s, providing 14% decrease in time. The time-reducing effect was consistently observed in both novice and experienced readers.

CONCLUSION

DBT combined with CAD reduced interpretation time without diagnostic performance loss to novice and experienced readers.

KEY POINTS

• The use of a concurrent DBT-CAD system shortened interpretation time. • The shortened interpretation time with DBT-CAD did not come at a cost to diagnostic performance to novice or experienced readers. • The concurrent DBT-CAD system improved the efficiency of DBT interpretation.

A review of computer aided detection in mammography

Breast screening with mammography is widely recognized as the most effective method of detecting early breast cancer and has consistently demonstrated a 20-40% decrease in mortality among screened women. Despite this, the sensitivity of mammography ranges between 70 and 90%. Computer aided detection (CAD) is an artificial intelligence (AI) technique that utilizes pattern recognition to highlight suspicious features on imaging and marks them for the radiologist to review and interpret. It aims to decrease oversights made by interpreting radiologists. Here we review the efficacy of CAD and potential future directions.

Evaluation of a computer-aided detection (CAD)-enhanced 2D synthetic mammogram: comparison with standard synthetic 2D mammograms and conventional 2D digital mammography

AIM

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of computer-aided detection (CAD)-enhanced synthetic mammograms in comparison with standard synthetic mammograms and full-field digital mammography (FFDM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A CAD-enhanced synthetic mammogram, a standard synthetic mammogram, and FFDM were available in 68 breast-screening cases recalled for soft-tissue abnormalities (masses, parenchymal deformities, and asymmetric densities). Two radiologists, blinded to image type and final assessment outcome, retrospectively read oblique and craniocaudal projections for each type of mammogram. The resulting 204 pairs of 2D images were presented in random order and scored on a five-point scale (1, normal to 5, malignant) without access to the Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) slices. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed.

RESULTS

There were 34 biopsy-proven malignancies and 34 normal/benign cases. Diagnostic accuracy was significantly improved for the CAD-enhanced synthetic mammogram compared to the standard synthetic mammogram (area under the ROC curve [AUC]=0.846 and AUC=0.683 respectively, p=0.004) and compared to the conventional 2D FFDM (AUC=0.724, p=0.027). The CAD-enhanced synthetic mammogram had the highest diagnostic accuracy for all soft-tissue abnormalities, and for malignant lesions sensitivity was not affected by tumour size. For all 68 cases, there was an average of 3.2 areas enhanced per image. For the 34 cancer cases, 97.4% of lesions were correctly enhanced, with 2.1 false areas enhanced per image.

CONCLUSIONS

CAD enhancement significantly improves performance of synthetic 2D mammograms and also exhibits improved diagnostic accuracy compared to conventional 2D FFDM.

Synthesized Mammography: Clinical Evidence, Appearance, and Implementation

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has improved conventional mammography by increasing cancer detection while reducing recall rates. However, these benefits come at the cost of increased radiation dose. Synthesized mammography (s2D) has been developed to provide the advantages of DBT with nearly half the radiation dose. Since its F.D.A. approval, multiple studies have evaluated the clinical performance of s2D. In clinical practice, s2D images are not identical to conventional 2D images and are designed for interpretation with DBT as a complement. This article reviews the present literature to assess whether s2D is a practical alternative to conventional 2D, addresses the differences in mammographic appearance of findings, and provides suggestions for implementation into clinical practice.