Literature DB >> 35614363

Using deep learning to safely exclude lesions with only ultrafast breast MRI to shorten acquisition and reading time.

Xueping Jing1, Mirjam Wielema2, Ludo J Cornelissen3, Margo van Gent2, Willie M Iwema4, Sunyi Zheng5, Paul E Sijens2, Matthijs Oudkerk6, Monique D Dorrius2, Peter M A van Ooijen5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility of automatically identifying normal scans in ultrafast breast MRI with artificial intelligence (AI) to increase efficiency and reduce workload.
METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, 837 breast MRI examinations performed on 438 women from April 2016 to October 2019 were included. The left and right breasts in each examination were labelled normal (without suspicious lesions) or abnormal (with suspicious lesions) based on final interpretation. Maximum intensity projection (MIP) images of each breast were then used to train a deep learning model. A high sensitivity threshold was calculated based on the detection trade - off (DET) curve on the validation set. The performance of the model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic analysis of the independent test set. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with the high sensitivity threshold were calculated.
RESULTS: The independent test set consisted of 178 examinations of 149 patients (mean age, 44 years ± 14 [standard deviation]). The trained model achieved an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.75-0.88) on the independent test set. Applying a threshold of 0.25 yielded a sensitivity of 98% (95% CI: 90%; 100%), an NPV of 98% (95% CI: 89%; 100%), a workload reduction of 15.7%, and a scan time reduction of 16.6%.
CONCLUSION: This deep learning model has a high potential to help identify normal scans in ultrafast breast MRI and thereby reduce radiologists' workload and scan time. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning in TWIST may eliminate the necessity of additional sequences for identifying normal breasts during MRI screening. • Workload and scanning time reductions of 15.7% and 16.6%, respectively, could be achieved with the cost of 1 (1 of 55) false negative prediction.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasms; Deep learning; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mass screening

Year:  2022        PMID: 35614363     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08863-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  21 in total

1.  Time to enhancement derived from ultrafast breast MRI as a novel parameter to discriminate benign from malignant breast lesions.

Authors:  Roel D Mus; Cristina Borelli; Peter Bult; Elisabeth Weiland; Nico Karssemeijer; Jelle O Barentsz; Albert Gubern-Mérida; Bram Platel; Ritse M Mann
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 3.528

2.  Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI.

Authors:  Christiane K Kuhl; Simone Schrading; Kevin Strobel; Hans H Schild; Ralf-Dieter Hilgers; Heribert B Bieling
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 3.  Fast MRI breast cancer screening - Ready for prime time.

Authors:  Sasan Partovi; David Sin; Ziang Lu; Leah Sieck; Holly Marshall; Ramya Pham; Donna Plecha
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2019-11-30       Impact factor: 1.605

4.  Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue.

Authors:  Marije F Bakker; Stéphanie V de Lange; Ruud M Pijnappel; Ritse M Mann; Petra H M Peeters; Evelyn M Monninkhof; Marleen J Emaus; Claudette E Loo; Robertus H C Bisschops; Marc B I Lobbes; Matthijn D F de Jong; Katya M Duvivier; Jeroen Veltman; Nico Karssemeijer; Harry J de Koning; Paul J van Diest; Willem P T M Mali; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Wouter B Veldhuis; Carla H van Gils
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Supplemental Breast MR Imaging Screening of Women with Average Risk of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Christiane K Kuhl; Kevin Strobel; Heribert Bieling; Claudia Leutner; Hans H Schild; Simone Schrading
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Performance of Screening Breast MRI across Women with Different Elevated Breast Cancer Risk Indications.

Authors:  Dorothy A Sippo; Kristine S Burk; Sarah F Mercaldo; Geoffrey M Rutledge; Christine Edmonds; Zoe Guan; Kevin S Hughes; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 7.  Novel Approaches to Screening for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Ritse M Mann; Regina Hooley; Richard G Barr; Linda Moy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  A novel approach to contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging for screening: high-resolution ultrafast dynamic imaging.

Authors:  Ritse M Mann; Roel D Mus; Jan van Zelst; Christian Geppert; Nico Karssemeijer; Bram Platel
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 6.016

9.  Abbreviated MRI of the Breast: Does It Provide Value?

Authors:  Doris Leithner; Linda Moy; Elizabeth A Morris; Maria A Marino; Thomas H Helbich; Katja Pinker
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-09-08       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Does it matter for the radiologists' performance whether they read short or long batches in organized mammographic screening?

Authors:  Heinrich A Backmann; Marthe Larsen; Anders S Danielsen; Solveig Hofvind
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.