Literature DB >> 34613796

Can artificial intelligence replace ultrasound as a complementary tool to mammogram for the diagnosis of the breast cancer?

Sahar Mansour1,2, Rasha Kamal1,2, Lamiaa Hashem1,2, Basma AlKalaawy1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the performance of mammogram with regard to the classification of the detected breast lesions in correlation to ultrasound-aided mammograms.
METHODS: Ethics committee approval was obtained in this prospective analysis. The study included 2000 mammograms. The mammograms were interpreted by the radiologists and breast ultrasound was performed for all cases. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score was applied regarding the combined evaluation of the mammogram and the ultrasound modalities. Each breast side was individually assessed with the aid of AI scanning in the form of targeted heat-map and then, a probability of malignancy (abnormality scoring percentage) was obtained. Operative and the histopathology data were the standard of reference.
RESULTS: Normal assigned cases (BI-RADS 1) with no lesions were excluded from the statistical evaluation. The study included 538 benign and 642 malignant breast lesions (n = 1180, 59%). BI-RADS categories for the breast lesions with regard to the combined evaluation of the digital mammogram and ultrasound were assigned BI-RADS 2 (Benign) in 385 lesions with AI median value of the abnormality scoring percentage of 10 (n = 385/1180, 32.6%), and BI-RADS 5 (malignant) in 471, that had showed median percentage AI value of 88 (n = 471/1180, 39.9%). AI abnormality scoring of 59% yielded a sensitivity of 96.8% and specificity of 90.1% in the discrimination of the breast lesions detected on the included mammograms.
CONCLUSION: AI could be considered as an optional primary reliable complementary tool to the digital mammogram for the evaluation of the breast lesions. The color hue and the abnormality scoring percentage presented a credible method for the detection and discrimination of breast cancer of near accuracy to the breast ultrasound. So consequently, AI- mammogram combination could be used as a one setting method to discriminate between cases that require further imaging or biopsy from those that need only time interval follows up. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Recently, the indulgence of AI in the work-up of breast cancer was concerned. AI noted as a screening strategy for the detection of breast cancer. In the current work, the performance of AI was studied with regard to the diagnosis not just the detection of breast cancer in the mammographic-detected breast lesions. The evaluation was concerned with AI as a possible complementary reading tool to mammogram and included the qualitative assessment of the color hue and the quantitative integration of the abnormality scoring percentage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34613796      PMCID: PMC8631011          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210820

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  14 in total

Review 1.  Can MR Imaging contribute in characterizing well-circumscribed breast carcinomas?

Authors:  Jung Lim Yoo; Ok Hee Woo; Yoon Kyung Kim; Kyu Ran Cho; Hwan Seok Yong; Bo Kyoung Seo; Aeree Kim; Eun-Young Kang
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.333

2.  Ultrasound positive predictive values by BI-RADS categories 3-5 for solid masses: An independent reader study.

Authors:  A Thomas Stavros; Andrea G Freitas; Giselle G N deMello; Lora Barke; Dennis McDonald; Terese Kaske; Ducly Wolverton; Arnold Honick; Daniela Stanzani; Adriana H Padovan; Ana Paula C Moura; Marilia C V de Campos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Artificial Intelligence in Breast Imaging: Potentials and Limitations.

Authors:  Ellen B Mendelson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Detecting Breast Cancers with Mammography: Will AI Succeed Where Traditional CAD Failed?

Authors:  Manisha Bahl
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  The Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem for the Radiological Sciences: Ideas to Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Bibb Allen; Keith Dreyer
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 6.  Artificial Intelligence for Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Current Concepts and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Krzysztof J Geras; Ritse M Mann; Linda Moy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Authors:  R D Rosenberg; W C Hunt; M R Williamson; F D Gilliland; P W Wiest; C A Kelsey; C R Key; M N Linver
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations.

Authors:  Thomas M Kolb; Jacob Lichy; Jeffrey H Newhouse
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 9.  Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future.

Authors:  Fei Jiang; Yong Jiang; Hui Zhi; Yi Dong; Hao Li; Sufeng Ma; Yilong Wang; Qiang Dong; Haipeng Shen; Yongjun Wang
Journal:  Stroke Vasc Neurol       Date:  2017-06-21

Review 10.  Artificial intelligence methods for the diagnosis of breast cancer by image processing: a review.

Authors:  Farahnaz Sadoughi; Zahra Kazemy; Farahnaz Hamedan; Leila Owji; Meysam Rahmanikatigari; Tahere Talebi Azadboni
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)       Date:  2018-11-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.