Application of a Commercial Artificial Intelligence Software in Unilateral Mammography: Simulating Total Mastectomy Scenarios.

Ji Yeong An, Janie M Lee, Myoung-Jin Jang, Su Min Ha, Jung Min Chang
{"title":"Application of a Commercial Artificial Intelligence Software in Unilateral Mammography: Simulating Total Mastectomy Scenarios.","authors":"Ji Yeong An, Janie M Lee, Myoung-Jin Jang, Su Min Ha, Jung Min Chang","doi":"10.1007/s10278-025-01432-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was to evaluate the performance of commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) software in unilateral mammograms simulating postmastectomy surveillance compared with AI software used in bilateral mammograms from the same women serving as controls. A retrospective database search identified consecutive women who underwent breast cancer surgery between January 2021 and December 2021. AI software was applied to the mammogram immediately preceding breast cancer diagnosis in two modes: bilateral (the standard bilateral mammography dataset) and unilateral analyses (each breast's craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique views), and their outputs were reviewed. The sensitivity, specificity, and number of marks per breast were compared between the bilateral and unilateral analyses with -5% non-inferiority margin for the difference in sensitivity and specificity between the two modes. A total of 694 women (mean age, 55.2 ± 10.8 years) with unilateral or bilateral breast cancer contributed mammograms for analysis; each breast was then separately evaluated in the unilateral postmastectomy simulation (n = 1388), of which 730 had breast cancer (52.6%) (mean invasive size = 1.5 cm) and compared with bilateral mammography analysis. The sensitivity of unilateral analysis was not inferior to that of bilateral analysis (78.6% vs. 76.7%), with a difference of 1.9%. The specificity of unilateral analysis was inferior to that in the bilateral analysis (81.5% vs. 91.9%), with a difference of -10.5% being lower than the non-inferiority margin. The average number of AI marks per breast was 0.94 (unilateral [1298/1388] and bilateral analyses [1306/1388], respectively). AI software performance in simulated unilateral mammography analysis demonstrated non-inferior sensitivity and inferior specificity compared to bilateral mammography.</p>","PeriodicalId":516858,"journal":{"name":"Journal of imaging informatics in medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of imaging informatics in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-025-01432-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study was to evaluate the performance of commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) software in unilateral mammograms simulating postmastectomy surveillance compared with AI software used in bilateral mammograms from the same women serving as controls. A retrospective database search identified consecutive women who underwent breast cancer surgery between January 2021 and December 2021. AI software was applied to the mammogram immediately preceding breast cancer diagnosis in two modes: bilateral (the standard bilateral mammography dataset) and unilateral analyses (each breast's craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique views), and their outputs were reviewed. The sensitivity, specificity, and number of marks per breast were compared between the bilateral and unilateral analyses with -5% non-inferiority margin for the difference in sensitivity and specificity between the two modes. A total of 694 women (mean age, 55.2 ± 10.8 years) with unilateral or bilateral breast cancer contributed mammograms for analysis; each breast was then separately evaluated in the unilateral postmastectomy simulation (n = 1388), of which 730 had breast cancer (52.6%) (mean invasive size = 1.5 cm) and compared with bilateral mammography analysis. The sensitivity of unilateral analysis was not inferior to that of bilateral analysis (78.6% vs. 76.7%), with a difference of 1.9%. The specificity of unilateral analysis was inferior to that in the bilateral analysis (81.5% vs. 91.9%), with a difference of -10.5% being lower than the non-inferiority margin. The average number of AI marks per breast was 0.94 (unilateral [1298/1388] and bilateral analyses [1306/1388], respectively). AI software performance in simulated unilateral mammography analysis demonstrated non-inferior sensitivity and inferior specificity compared to bilateral mammography.

商业人工智能软件在单侧乳腺造影术中的应用:模拟全乳房切除术场景
本研究旨在评估市售人工智能(AI)软件在模拟乳房切除术后监护的单侧乳房X光照片中的性能,并与作为对照组的同一女性的双侧乳房X光照片中使用的人工智能软件进行比较。通过回顾性数据库搜索,确定了在 2021 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间接受乳腺癌手术的连续女性。人工智能软件以两种模式应用于乳腺癌诊断前的乳房X光检查:双侧(标准双侧乳房X光检查数据集)和单侧分析(每个乳房的头尾切面和内外侧斜切面),并对其输出结果进行了审查。比较了双侧分析和单侧分析的灵敏度、特异性和每个乳房的标记数,两种模式的灵敏度和特异性差异的非劣效差为-5%。共有 694 名患有单侧或双侧乳腺癌的女性(平均年龄为 55.2 ± 10.8 岁)提供了乳房 X 光照片供分析;然后在单侧乳房切除术后模拟(n = 1388)中对每侧乳房进行单独评估,其中 730 人(52.6%)患有乳腺癌(平均浸润大小 = 1.5 厘米),并与双侧乳房 X 光分析进行比较。单侧分析的灵敏度不低于双侧分析(78.6% 对 76.7%),两者相差 1.9%。单侧分析的特异性低于双侧分析(81.5% 对 91.9%),差值为-10.5%,低于非劣效区。每个乳房的平均人工智能标记数为 0.94(分别为单侧[1298/1388]和双侧[1306/1388])。在模拟单侧乳腺 X 射线照相分析中,人工智能软件的灵敏度和特异性均低于双侧乳腺 X 射线照相分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信