人工智能与放射科医生在乳房x光检查中检测早期乳腺癌:范式转变的荟萃分析。

Polish journal of radiology Pub Date : 2025-01-06 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5114/pjr/195520
Hashim Talib Hashim, Ahmed Qasim Mohammed Alhatemi, Motaz Daraghma, Hossam Tharwat Ali, Mudassir Ahmad Khan, Fatimah Abdullah Sulaiman, Zahraa Hussein Ali, Mohanad Ahmed Sahib, Ahmed Dheyaa Al-Obaidi, Ammar Al-Obaidi
{"title":"人工智能与放射科医生在乳房x光检查中检测早期乳腺癌:范式转变的荟萃分析。","authors":"Hashim Talib Hashim, Ahmed Qasim Mohammed Alhatemi, Motaz Daraghma, Hossam Tharwat Ali, Mudassir Ahmad Khan, Fatimah Abdullah Sulaiman, Zahraa Hussein Ali, Mohanad Ahmed Sahib, Ahmed Dheyaa Al-Obaidi, Ammar Al-Obaidi","doi":"10.5114/pjr/195520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Early detection of breast cancer is crucial for improving patient outcomes. With advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), there is growing interest in its potential to assist radiologists in interpreting mammograms for early cancer detection. AI algorithms offer the promise of increased accuracy and efficiency in identifying subtle signs of breast cancer, potentially complementing the expertise of radiologists and enhancing the screening process for early-stage breast cancer detection.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and select original research reports on breast cancer diagnosis by artificial intelligence versus conventional radiologists in using mammograms in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Data were analysed with Review Manager version 5.4. <i>P</i>-value and <i>I<sup>2</sup></i> were used to test the significance of differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis included 8 studies with data from a total of 120,950 patients. Regarding the sensitivity of AI, the pooled analysis of 6 studies with sensitivities ranging from 0.70 to 0.89 yielded a sensitivity of 0.85. However, the sensitivity of the radiologists ranged from 0.63 to 0.85, with an overall sensitivity of 0.77. As for specificity, both radiologists and AI groups had closer results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The comparison between AI systems and radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms highlights the potential of AI as a valuable tool in breast cancer screening. While AI algorithms have shown promising results in terms of accuracy and efficiency, they should be viewed as complementary to radiologists rather than replacements.</p>","PeriodicalId":94174,"journal":{"name":"Polish journal of radiology","volume":"90 ","pages":"e1-e8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11891547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence versus radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms: a meta-analysis of paradigm shifts.\",\"authors\":\"Hashim Talib Hashim, Ahmed Qasim Mohammed Alhatemi, Motaz Daraghma, Hossam Tharwat Ali, Mudassir Ahmad Khan, Fatimah Abdullah Sulaiman, Zahraa Hussein Ali, Mohanad Ahmed Sahib, Ahmed Dheyaa Al-Obaidi, Ammar Al-Obaidi\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/pjr/195520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Early detection of breast cancer is crucial for improving patient outcomes. With advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), there is growing interest in its potential to assist radiologists in interpreting mammograms for early cancer detection. AI algorithms offer the promise of increased accuracy and efficiency in identifying subtle signs of breast cancer, potentially complementing the expertise of radiologists and enhancing the screening process for early-stage breast cancer detection.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and select original research reports on breast cancer diagnosis by artificial intelligence versus conventional radiologists in using mammograms in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Data were analysed with Review Manager version 5.4. <i>P</i>-value and <i>I<sup>2</sup></i> were used to test the significance of differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis included 8 studies with data from a total of 120,950 patients. Regarding the sensitivity of AI, the pooled analysis of 6 studies with sensitivities ranging from 0.70 to 0.89 yielded a sensitivity of 0.85. However, the sensitivity of the radiologists ranged from 0.63 to 0.85, with an overall sensitivity of 0.77. As for specificity, both radiologists and AI groups had closer results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The comparison between AI systems and radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms highlights the potential of AI as a valuable tool in breast cancer screening. While AI algorithms have shown promising results in terms of accuracy and efficiency, they should be viewed as complementary to radiologists rather than replacements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polish journal of radiology\",\"volume\":\"90 \",\"pages\":\"e1-e8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11891547/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polish journal of radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr/195520\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr/195520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:早期发现乳腺癌对改善患者预后至关重要。随着人工智能(AI)的进步,人们对其协助放射科医生解释乳房x光片以早期癌症检测的潜力越来越感兴趣。人工智能算法有望提高识别乳腺癌细微迹象的准确性和效率,有可能补充放射科医生的专业知识,并加强早期乳腺癌检测的筛查过程。材料和方法:根据PRISMA指南,进行系统的文献综述,以识别和选择人工智能与传统放射科医生使用乳房x光片诊断乳腺癌的原始研究报告。使用Review Manager版本5.4对数据进行分析。采用p值和I2来检验差异的显著性。结果:本系统综述和荟萃分析包括8项研究,数据来自120,950名患者。对于AI的敏感性,对敏感性在0.70 ~ 0.89之间的6项研究进行汇总分析,得出敏感性为0.85。然而,放射科医生的敏感度在0.63至0.85之间,总体敏感度为0.77。至于特异性,放射科医生和人工智能小组的结果都更接近。结论:人工智能系统与放射科医生在从乳房x光检查中检测早期乳腺癌方面的比较,突显了人工智能作为乳腺癌筛查有价值工具的潜力。虽然人工智能算法在准确性和效率方面显示出了令人鼓舞的结果,但它们应被视为放射科医生的补充,而不是替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Artificial intelligence versus radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms: a meta-analysis of paradigm shifts.

Artificial intelligence versus radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms: a meta-analysis of paradigm shifts.

Artificial intelligence versus radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms: a meta-analysis of paradigm shifts.

Artificial intelligence versus radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms: a meta-analysis of paradigm shifts.

Purpose: Early detection of breast cancer is crucial for improving patient outcomes. With advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), there is growing interest in its potential to assist radiologists in interpreting mammograms for early cancer detection. AI algorithms offer the promise of increased accuracy and efficiency in identifying subtle signs of breast cancer, potentially complementing the expertise of radiologists and enhancing the screening process for early-stage breast cancer detection.

Material and methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and select original research reports on breast cancer diagnosis by artificial intelligence versus conventional radiologists in using mammograms in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Data were analysed with Review Manager version 5.4. P-value and I2 were used to test the significance of differences.

Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 8 studies with data from a total of 120,950 patients. Regarding the sensitivity of AI, the pooled analysis of 6 studies with sensitivities ranging from 0.70 to 0.89 yielded a sensitivity of 0.85. However, the sensitivity of the radiologists ranged from 0.63 to 0.85, with an overall sensitivity of 0.77. As for specificity, both radiologists and AI groups had closer results.

Conclusions: The comparison between AI systems and radiologists in detecting early-stage breast cancer from mammograms highlights the potential of AI as a valuable tool in breast cancer screening. While AI algorithms have shown promising results in terms of accuracy and efficiency, they should be viewed as complementary to radiologists rather than replacements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信