Laurie R Margolies1, Gaurav Pandey2, Eliot R Horowitz3, David S Mendelson4. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Pl, Box 1234, New York, NY 10029. 2. 2 Department of Genetics and Genomic Science and Icahn Institute for Genomics and Multiscale Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. 3. 3 MongoDB, New York, NY. 4. 4 Department of Radiology, Clinical Informatics, Radiology IT, Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to describe structured reporting and the development of large databases for use in data mining in breast imaging. CONCLUSION: The results of millions of breast imaging examinations are reported with structured tools based on the BI-RADS lexicon. Much of these data are stored in accessible media. Robust computing power creates great opportunity for data scientists and breast imagers to collaborate to improve breast cancer detection and optimize screening algorithms. Data mining can create knowledge, but the questions asked and their complexity require extremely powerful and agile databases. New data technologies can facilitate outcomes research and precision medicine.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to describe structured reporting and the development of large databases for use in data mining in breast imaging. CONCLUSION: The results of millions of breast imaging examinations are reported with structured tools based on the BI-RADS lexicon. Much of these data are stored in accessible media. Robust computing power creates great opportunity for data scientists and breast imagers to collaborate to improve breast cancer detection and optimize screening algorithms. Data mining can create knowledge, but the questions asked and their complexity require extremely powerful and agile databases. New data technologies can facilitate outcomes research and precision medicine.
Entities:
Keywords:
breast cancer; breast imaging; data mining; precision medicine; structured reporting
Authors: D Bernardi; M Pellegrini; S Di Michele; P Tuttobene; C Fantò; M Valentini; M Gentilini; S Ciatto Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-01-07 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Oswald Graf; Thomas H Helbich; Michael H Fuchsjaeger; Gottfried Hopf; Margarita Morgun; Claudia Graf; Reinhold Mallek; Edward A Sickles Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: K Kerlikowske; D Grady; J Barclay; S D Frankel; S H Ominsky; E A Sickles; V Ernster Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-12-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Stamatia V Destounis; Andrea L Arieno; Renee C Morgan; David Cavanaugh; Posy J Seifert; Philip F Murphy; Patricia A Somerville Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Franziska Schoeppe; Wieland H Sommer; Mareike Haack; Miriam Havel; Marika Rheinwald; Juliane Wechtenbruch; Martin R Fischer; Felix G Meinel; Bastian O Sabel; Nora N Sommer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Elizabeth A Sadowski; Atul B Shinagare; Hyesun Park; Olga R Brook; Rosemarie Forstner; Sumer K Wallace; Jeanne M Horowitz; Neil Horowitz; Marcia Javitt; Priyanka Jha; Aki Kido; Yulia Lakhman; Susanna I Lee; Lucia Manganaro; Katherine E Maturen; Stephanie Nougaret; Liina Poder; Gaiane M Rauch; Caroline Reinhold; Evis Sala; Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara; Herbert Alberto Vargas; Aradhana Venkatesan; Olivera Nikolic; Andrea G Rockall Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 7.034
Authors: Shuchi K Rodgers; David T Fetzer; Helena Gabriel; James H Seow; Hailey H Choi; Katherine E Maturen; Ashish P Wasnik; Tara A Morgan; Nirvikar Dahiya; Mary K O'Boyle; Yuko Kono; Claude B Sirlin; Aya Kamaya Journal: Radiographics Date: 2019 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.333