Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Breast Cancer | Research

Multi-vendor evaluation of artificial intelligence as an independent reader for double reading in breast cancer screening on 275,900 mammograms

Authors: Nisha Sharma, Annie Y. Ng, Jonathan J. James, Galvin Khara, Éva Ambrózay, Christopher C. Austin, Gábor Forrai, Georgia Fox, Ben Glocker, Andreas Heindl, Edit Karpati, Tobias M. Rijken, Vignesh Venkataraman, Joseph E. Yearsley, Peter D. Kecskemethy

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Double reading (DR) in screening mammography increases cancer detection and lowers recall rates, but has sustainability challenges due to workforce shortages. Artificial intelligence (AI) as an independent reader (IR) in DR may provide a cost-effective solution with the potential to improve screening performance. Evidence for AI to generalise across different patient populations, screening programmes and equipment vendors, however, is still lacking.

Methods

This retrospective study simulated DR with AI as an IR, using data representative of real-world deployments (275,900 cases, 177,882 participants) from four mammography equipment vendors, seven screening sites, and two countries. Non-inferiority and superiority were assessed for relevant screening metrics.

Results

DR with AI, compared with human DR, showed at least non-inferior recall rate, cancer detection rate, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for each mammography vendor and site, and superior recall rate, specificity, and PPV for some. The simulation indicates that using AI would have increased arbitration rate (3.3% to 12.3%), but could have reduced human workload by 30.0% to 44.8%.

Conclusions

AI has potential as an IR in the DR workflow across different screening programmes, mammography equipment and geographies, substantially reducing human reader workload while maintaining or improving standard of care.

Trial registration

ISRCTN18056078 (20/03/2019; retrospectively registered).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
2.
go back to reference Tabar L, Yen M, Vitak B, et al. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. The Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1405–10.CrossRef Tabar L, Yen M, Vitak B, et al. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. The Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1405–10.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Duffy SW, Tabár L, Yen AM, et al. Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women. Cancer. 2020;126(13):2971–9.CrossRefPubMed Duffy SW, Tabár L, Yen AM, et al. Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women. Cancer. 2020;126(13):2971–9.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, et al. Breast-cancer screening — Viewpoint of the IARC working group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2353–8.CrossRefPubMed Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, et al. Breast-cancer screening — Viewpoint of the IARC working group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2353–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
go back to reference Zielonke N, Kregting LM, Heijnsdijk EAM, et al. The potential of breast cancer screening in Europe. Int J Cancer. 2021;148(2):406–18.CrossRefPubMed Zielonke N, Kregting LM, Heijnsdijk EAM, et al. The potential of breast cancer screening in Europe. Int J Cancer. 2021;148(2):406–18.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition—summary document. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(4):614–22.CrossRefPubMed Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition—summary document. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(4):614–22.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hamashima CC, Hattori M, Honjo S, et al. The Japanese guidelines for breast cancer screening. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2016;46(4):482–92.CrossRefPubMed Hamashima CC, Hattori M, Honjo S, et al. The Japanese guidelines for breast cancer screening. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2016;46(4):482–92.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Harvey SC, Geller B, Oppenheimer RG, et al. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180:14611467.CrossRef Harvey SC, Geller B, Oppenheimer RG, et al. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180:14611467.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, et al. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen. 2005;12:103–6.CrossRefPubMed Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, et al. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen. 2005;12:103–6.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Blanks RG, Wallis MG, Moss SM. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen. 1998;5:195–201.CrossRefPubMed Blanks RG, Wallis MG, Moss SM. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen. 1998;5:195–201.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Rimmer A. Radiologist shortage leaves patient care at risk, warns royal college. BMJ. 2017;10(11):359-j4683. Rimmer A. Radiologist shortage leaves patient care at risk, warns royal college. BMJ. 2017;10(11):359-j4683.
17.
go back to reference Gulland A. Staff shortages are putting UK breast cancer screening “at risk”, survey finds. BMJ. 2016;10(1136): i2350.CrossRef Gulland A. Staff shortages are putting UK breast cancer screening “at risk”, survey finds. BMJ. 2016;10(1136): i2350.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buist DS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(11):1828–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buist DS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(11):1828–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Keen JD, Keen JM, Keen JE. Utilization of computer-aided detection for digital screening mammography in the United States, 2008–2016. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:44–8.CrossRefPubMed Keen JD, Keen JM, Keen JE. Utilization of computer-aided detection for digital screening mammography in the United States, 2008–2016. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:44–8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buise DS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:1828–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buise DS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:1828–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Gilbert F, Astley S, Gillan M, Agbaje O, Wallis M, James J, Boggis C, Duffy S. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(16):1675–84.CrossRefPubMed Gilbert F, Astley S, Gillan M, Agbaje O, Wallis M, James J, Boggis C, Duffy S. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(16):1675–84.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Wu N, Phang J, Park J, et al. Deep neural networks improve radiologists’ performance in breast cancer screening. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2020;39(4):1184–94.CrossRefPubMed Wu N, Phang J, Park J, et al. Deep neural networks improve radiologists’ performance in breast cancer screening. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2020;39(4):1184–94.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Kim H, Kim HH, Han B, et al. Changes in cancer detection and false-positive recall in mammography using artificial intelligence: a retrospective, multireader study. The Lancet Digital Health. 2020;2(3):e138–48.CrossRefPubMed Kim H, Kim HH, Han B, et al. Changes in cancer detection and false-positive recall in mammography using artificial intelligence: a retrospective, multireader study. The Lancet Digital Health. 2020;2(3):e138–48.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Lotter W, Diab AR, Haslam B, et al. Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using an annotation-efficient deep learning approach. Nat Med. 2021;27(2):244–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lotter W, Diab AR, Haslam B, et al. Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using an annotation-efficient deep learning approach. Nat Med. 2021;27(2):244–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference McKinney SM, Sieniek M, Godbole V, et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature. 2020;577(7788):89–94.CrossRefPubMed McKinney SM, Sieniek M, Godbole V, et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature. 2020;577(7788):89–94.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Salim M, Wåhlin E, Dembrower K, et al. External evaluation of 3 commercial artificial intelligence algorithms for independent assessment of screening mammograms. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(10):1581.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Salim M, Wåhlin E, Dembrower K, et al. External evaluation of 3 commercial artificial intelligence algorithms for independent assessment of screening mammograms. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(10):1581.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Pacilè S, Lopez J, Chone P, Bertinotti T, Grouin JM, Fillard P. Improving breast cancer detection accuracy of mammography with the concurrent use of an artificial intelligence tool. Radiol Artif Intell. 2020;2: e190208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Pacilè S, Lopez J, Chone P, Bertinotti T, Grouin JM, Fillard P. Improving breast cancer detection accuracy of mammography with the concurrent use of an artificial intelligence tool. Radiol Artif Intell. 2020;2: e190208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Leibig C, Brehmer M, Bunk S, Byng D, Pinker K, Umutlu L. Combining the strengths of radiologists and AI for breast cancer screening: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Digit Health. 2022;4(7):e507–19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Leibig C, Brehmer M, Bunk S, Byng D, Pinker K, Umutlu L. Combining the strengths of radiologists and AI for breast cancer screening: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Digit Health. 2022;4(7):e507–19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Raya-Povedano JL, Romero-Martín S, Elías-Cabot E, Gubern-Mérida A, Rodríguez-Ruiz A, Álvarez-Benito M. AI-based Strategies to reduce workload in breast cancer screening with mammography and tomosynthesis: a retrospective evaluation. Radiology. 2021;300:57–65.CrossRefPubMed Raya-Povedano JL, Romero-Martín S, Elías-Cabot E, Gubern-Mérida A, Rodríguez-Ruiz A, Álvarez-Benito M. AI-based Strategies to reduce workload in breast cancer screening with mammography and tomosynthesis: a retrospective evaluation. Radiology. 2021;300:57–65.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Freeman K, Geppert J, Stinton C, Todkill D, Johnson S, Clarke A, Taylor-Phillips S. Use of artificial intelligence for image analysis in breast cancer screening programmes: systematic review of test accuracy. bmj. 1872;2021:374. Freeman K, Geppert J, Stinton C, Todkill D, Johnson S, Clarke A, Taylor-Phillips S. Use of artificial intelligence for image analysis in breast cancer screening programmes: systematic review of test accuracy. bmj. 1872;2021:374.
Metadata
Title
Multi-vendor evaluation of artificial intelligence as an independent reader for double reading in breast cancer screening on 275,900 mammograms
Authors
Nisha Sharma
Annie Y. Ng
Jonathan J. James
Galvin Khara
Éva Ambrózay
Christopher C. Austin
Gábor Forrai
Georgia Fox
Ben Glocker
Andreas Heindl
Edit Karpati
Tobias M. Rijken
Vignesh Venkataraman
Joseph E. Yearsley
Peter D. Kecskemethy
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-023-10890-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Cancer 1/2023 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine