TY - JOUR
T1 - Detection of breast cancer with mammography
T2 - Effect of an artificial intelligence support system
AU - Rodríguez-Ruiz, Alejandro
AU - Krupinski, Elizabeth
AU - Mordang, Jan Jurre
AU - Schilling, Kathy
AU - Heywang-Köbrunner, Sylvia H.
AU - Sechopoulos, Ioannis
AU - Mann, Ritse M.
N1 - Funding Information:
This retrospective study was compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Our study was performed with anonymized, retrospectively collected digital mammographic images obtained from screening examinations. Women were included from two institutions: one in the United States (collection center A) and one in Europe (collection center B). The requirement to obtain informed consent and ethical approval to use anonymized data was waived after review of the institutional review board at collection center A and under national law at collection center B. The study was financially supported by ScreenPoint Medical (Nijmegen, the Netherlands). The authors who were not employees of or consultants for ScreenPoint Medical had control of the data and information submitted for publication at all times.
Funding Information:
The authors thank Barco (Kortrijk, Belgium) for providing the displays for the study. ScreenPoint Medical is a spinoff company from the Radboudumc. While there is no financial relationship between ScreenPoint Medical and I.S. and R.M.M., we do work closely together with its CEO, who is also a professor at our department. There is a master research agreement (MRA) between the Radboudumc (department of radiology) and ScreenPoint Medical that describes terms of cooperation. For this project, an addendum to the MRA was signed that details the roles of the investigators and ScreenPoint Medical in this specific study. ScreenPoint Medical was responsible for data generation and paid all external costs of the study. I.S. and R.M.M work as independent investigators for the Radboudumc and did not receive any financial compensation from ScreenPoint Medical for this work. We guarantee the quality of the data and are responsible for the statistical analysis. We were free to publish the results, with the only precondition that we first reported the results to ScreenPoint Medical.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Radiological Society of North America Inc.All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2019/3/1
Y1 - 2019/3/1
N2 - Purpose: To compare breast cancer detection performance of radiologists reading mammographic examinations unaided versus supported by an artificial intelligence (AI) system. Materials and Methods: An enriched retrospective, fully crossed, multireader, multicase, HIPAA-compliant study was performed. Screening digital mammographic examinations from 240 women (median age, 62 years; range, 39–89 years) performed between 2013 and 2017 were included. The 240 examinations (100 showing cancers, 40 leading to false-positive recalls, 100 normal) were interpreted by 14 Mammography Quality Standards Act–qualified radiologists, once with and once without AI support. The readers provided a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System score and probability of malignancy. AI support provided radiologists with interactive decision support (clicking on a breast region yields a local cancer likelihood score), traditional lesion markers for computer-detected abnormalities, and an examination-based cancer likelihood score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), specificity and sensitivity, and reading time were compared between conditions by using mixed-models analysis dof variance and generalized linear models for multiple repeated measurements. Results: On average, the AUC was higher with AI support than with unaided reading (0.89 vs 0.87, respectively; P = .002). Sensitivity increased with AI support (86% [86 of 100] vs 83% [83 of 100]; P = .046), whereas specificity trended toward improvement (79% [111 of 140]) vs 77% [108 of 140]; P = .06). Reading time per case was similar (unaided, 146 seconds; supported by AI, 149 seconds; P = .15). The AUC with the AI system alone was similar to the average AUC of the radiologists (0.89 vs 0.87). Conclusion: Radiologists improved their cancer detection at mammography when using an artificial intelligence system for support, without requiring additional reading time.
AB - Purpose: To compare breast cancer detection performance of radiologists reading mammographic examinations unaided versus supported by an artificial intelligence (AI) system. Materials and Methods: An enriched retrospective, fully crossed, multireader, multicase, HIPAA-compliant study was performed. Screening digital mammographic examinations from 240 women (median age, 62 years; range, 39–89 years) performed between 2013 and 2017 were included. The 240 examinations (100 showing cancers, 40 leading to false-positive recalls, 100 normal) were interpreted by 14 Mammography Quality Standards Act–qualified radiologists, once with and once without AI support. The readers provided a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System score and probability of malignancy. AI support provided radiologists with interactive decision support (clicking on a breast region yields a local cancer likelihood score), traditional lesion markers for computer-detected abnormalities, and an examination-based cancer likelihood score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), specificity and sensitivity, and reading time were compared between conditions by using mixed-models analysis dof variance and generalized linear models for multiple repeated measurements. Results: On average, the AUC was higher with AI support than with unaided reading (0.89 vs 0.87, respectively; P = .002). Sensitivity increased with AI support (86% [86 of 100] vs 83% [83 of 100]; P = .046), whereas specificity trended toward improvement (79% [111 of 140]) vs 77% [108 of 140]; P = .06). Reading time per case was similar (unaided, 146 seconds; supported by AI, 149 seconds; P = .15). The AUC with the AI system alone was similar to the average AUC of the radiologists (0.89 vs 0.87). Conclusion: Radiologists improved their cancer detection at mammography when using an artificial intelligence system for support, without requiring additional reading time.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060384196&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060384196&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2018181371
DO - 10.1148/radiol.2018181371
M3 - Article
C2 - 30457482
AN - SCOPUS:85060384196
SN - 0033-8419
VL - 290
SP - 305
EP - 314
JO - Radiology
JF - Radiology
IS - 3
ER -