St Andrews Research Repository

St Andrews University Home
View Item 
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  • Register / Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Impact of different mammography systems on artificial intelligence performance in breast cancer screening

Thumbnail
View/Open
DeVries_etal_RAI_Impact_Of_Different_AAM.pdf (632.9Kb)
Date
01/05/2023
Author
de Vries, Clarisse F.
Colosimo, Samantha J.
Staff, Roger T.
Dymiter, Jaroslaw A.
Yearsley, Joseph
Dinneen, Deirdre
Boyle, Moragh
Harrison, David J.
Anderson, Lesley A.
Lip, Gerald
Black, Corri
Murray, Alison D.
Wilde, Katie
Blackwood, James D.
Butterly, Claire
Zurowski, John
Eilbeck, Jon
McSkimming, Colin
Funder
Innovate UK
Grant ID
TS/S013121/1
Keywords
Breast
Screening
Mammography
Computer applications: detection/diagnosis
Neoplasms: primary
Technology assessment
RC0254 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology (including Cancer)
3rd-DAS
SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
MCC
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools may assist breast screening mammography programs, but limited evidence supports their generalizability to new settings. This retrospective study used a 3-year dataset (April 1, 2016-March 31, 2019) from a U.K. regional screening program. The performance of a commercially available breast screening AI algorithm was assessed with a prespecified and site-specific decision threshold to evaluate whether its performance was transferable to a new clinical site. The dataset consisted of women (aged approximately 50-70 years) who attended routine screening, excluding self-referrals, those with complex physical requirements, those who had undergone a previous mastectomy, and those who underwent screening that had technical recalls or did not have the four standard image views. In total, 55916 screening attendees (mean age, 60 years ± 6 [SD]) met the inclusion criteria. The prespecified threshold resulted in high recall rates (48.3%, 21929 of 45444), which reduced to 13.0% (5896 of 45444) following threshold calibration, closer to the observed service level (5.0%, 2774 of 55916). Recall rates also increased approximately threefold following a software upgrade on the mammography equipment, requiring per-software version thresholds. Using software-specific thresholds, the AI algorithm would have recalled 277 of 303 (91.4%) screen-detected cancers and 47 of 138 (34.1%) interval cancers. AI performance and thresholds should be validated for new clinical settings before deployment, while quality assurance systems should monitor AI performance for consistency.
Citation
de Vries , C F , Colosimo , S J , Staff , R T , Dymiter , J A , Yearsley , J , Dinneen , D , Boyle , M , Harrison , D J , Anderson , L A , Lip , G , Black , C , Murray , A D , Wilde , K , Blackwood , J D , Butterly , C , Zurowski , J , Eilbeck , J & McSkimming , C 2023 , ' Impact of different mammography systems on artificial intelligence performance in breast cancer screening ' , Radiology: Artificial Intelligence , vol. 5 , no. 3 , e220146 . https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.220146
Publication
Radiology: Artificial Intelligence
Status
Peer reviewed
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.220146
Type
Journal article
Rights
Copyright © 2023 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. This work has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies or with permission. This accepted manuscript is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. This is the author created accepted manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.220146
Description
Funding: Supported by the Industrical Centre of Artificial Intelligence Research in Digital Diagnosis (iCAIRD), which is funded by Innovate UK on behalf of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) (project no. 104690).
Collections
  • University of St Andrews Research
URL
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10245180/
https://europepmc.org/article/MED/37293340
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10023/27836

Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Advanced Search

Browse

All of RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunderThis CollectionBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunder

My Account

Login

Open Access

To find out how you can benefit from open access to research, see our library web pages and Open Access blog. For open access help contact: openaccess@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Accessibility

Read our Accessibility statement.

How to submit research papers

The full text of research papers can be submitted to the repository via Pure, the University's research information system. For help see our guide: How to deposit in Pure.

Electronic thesis deposit

Help with deposit.

Repository help

For repository help contact: Digital-Repository@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Give Feedback

Cookie policy

This site may use cookies. Please see Terms and Conditions.

Usage statistics

COUNTER-compliant statistics on downloads from the repository are available from the IRUS-UK Service. Contact us for information.

© University of St Andrews Library

University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013532.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter