| Literature DB >> 31894144 |
Scott Mayer McKinney1, Marcin Sieniek2, Varun Godbole2, Jonathan Godwin3, Natasha Antropova3, Hutan Ashrafian4,5, Trevor Back3, Mary Chesus3, Greg S Corrado2, Ara Darzi4,5,6, Mozziyar Etemadi7, Florencia Garcia-Vicente7, Fiona J Gilbert8, Mark Halling-Brown9, Demis Hassabis3, Sunny Jansen10, Alan Karthikesalingam11, Christopher J Kelly11, Dominic King11, Joseph R Ledsam3, David Melnick7, Hormuz Mostofi2, Lily Peng2, Joshua Jay Reicher12, Bernardino Romera-Paredes3, Richard Sidebottom13,14, Mustafa Suleyman3, Daniel Tse15, Kenneth C Young9, Jeffrey De Fauw3, Shravya Shetty16.
Abstract
Screening mammography aims to identify breast cancer at earlier stages of the disease, when treatment can be more successful1. Despite the existence of screening programmes worldwide, the interpretation of mammograms is affected by high rates of false positives and false negatives2. Here we present an artificial intelligence (AI) system that is capable of surpassing human experts in breast cancer prediction. To assess its performance in the clinical setting, we curated a large representative dataset from the UK and a large enriched dataset from the USA. We show an absolute reduction of 5.7% and 1.2% (USA and UK) in false positives and 9.4% and 2.7% in false negatives. We provide evidence of the ability of the system to generalize from the UK to the USA. In an independent study of six radiologists, the AI system outperformed all of the human readers: the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) for the AI system was greater than the AUC-ROC for the average radiologist by an absolute margin of 11.5%. We ran a simulation in which the AI system participated in the double-reading process that is used in the UK, and found that the AI system maintained non-inferior performance and reduced the workload of the second reader by 88%. This robust assessment of the AI system paves the way for clinical trials to improve the accuracy and efficiency of breast cancer screening.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31894144 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1799-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nature ISSN: 0028-0836 Impact factor: 49.962