Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of different reading strategies implementing artificial intelligence.

OBJECTIVES: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) can detect more cancers than the current standard breast screening method, digital mammography (DM); however, it can substantially increase the reading workload and thus hinder implementation in screening. Artificial intelligence (AI) might be a solution. The aim of this study was to retrospectively test different ways of using AI in a screening workflow. METHODS: An AI system was used to analyse 14,772 double-read single-view DBT examinations from a screening trial with paired DM double reading. Three scenarios were studied: if AI can identify normal cases that can be excluded from human reading; if AI can replace the second reader; if AI can replace both readers. The number of detected cancers and false positives was compared with DM or DBT double reading. RESULTS: By excluding normal cases and only reading 50.5% (7460/14,772) of all examinations, 95% (121/127) of the DBT double reading detected cancers could be detected. Compared to DM screening, 27% (26/95) more cancers could be detected (p < 0.001) while keeping recall rates at the same level. With AI replacing the second reader, 95% (120/127) of the DBT double reading detected cancers could be detected-26% (25/95) more than DM screening (p < 0.001)-while increasing recall rates by 53%. AI alone with DBT has a sensitivity similar to DM double reading (p = 0.689). CONCLUSION: AI can open up possibilities for implementing DBT screening and detecting more cancers with the total reading workload unchanged. Considering the potential legal and psychological implications, replacing the second reader with AI would probably be most the feasible approach. KEY POINTS: • Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis and artificial intelligence can detect more cancers than mammography screening without increasing screen-reading workload. • Artificial intelligence can either exclude low-risk cases from double reading or replace the second reader. • Retrospective study based on paired mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis screening data.

Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to identify normal mammograms in a screening population. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 9581 double-read mammography screening exams including 68 screen-detected cancers and 187 false positives, a subcohort of the prospective population-based Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, were analysed with a deep learning-based AI system. The AI system categorises mammograms with a cancer risk score increasing from 1 to 10. The effect on cancer detection and false positives of excluding mammograms below different AI risk thresholds from reading by radiologists was investigated. A panel of three breast radiologists assessed the radiographic appearance, type, and visibility of screen-detected cancers assigned low-risk scores (≤ 5). The reduction of normal exams, cancers, and false positives for the different thresholds was presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: If mammograms scored 1 and 2 were excluded from screen-reading, 1829 (19.1%; 95% CI 18.3-19.9) exams could be removed, including 10 (5.3%; 95% CI 2.1-8.6) false positives but no cancers. In total, 5082 (53.0%; 95% CI 52.0-54.0) exams, including 7 (10.3%; 95% CI 3.1-17.5) cancers and 52 (27.8%; 95% CI 21.4-34.2) false positives, had low-risk scores. All, except one, of the seven screen-detected cancers with low-risk scores were judged to be clearly visible. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated AI system can correctly identify a proportion of a screening population as cancer-free and also reduce false positives. Thus, AI has the potential to improve mammography screening efficiency. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective study showed that AI can identify a proportion of mammograms as normal in a screening population. • Excluding normal exams from screening using AI can reduce false positives.

Personalized breast cancer screening with selective addition of digital breast tomosynthesis through artificial intelligence.

Purpose: Breast cancer screening is predominantly performed using digital mammography (DM), but digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has higher sensitivity. DBT demands more resources than DM, and it might be more feasible to reserve DBT for women with a clear benefit from the technique. We explore if artificial intelligence (AI) can select women who would benefit from DBT imaging. Approach: We used data from Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, where all women prospectively were examined with separately double read DM and DBT. We retrospectively analyzed DM examinations (n=14768) with a breast cancer detection system and used the provided risk score (1 to 10) for risk stratification. We tested how different score thresholds for adding DBT to an initial DM affects the number of detected cancers, additional DBT examinations needed, detection rate, and false positives. Results: If using a threshold of 9.0, 25 (26%) more cancers would be detected compared to using DM alone. Of the 41 cancers only detected on DBT, 61% would be detected, with only 1797 (12%) of the women examined with both DM and DBT. The detection rate for the added DBT would be 14/1000 women, whereas the false-positive recalls would be increased with 58 (21%). Conclusion: Using DBT only for selected high gain cases could be an alternative to complete DBT screening. AI can analyze initial DM images to identify high gain cases where DBT can be added during the same visit. There might be logistical challenges, and further studies in a prospective setting are necessary.

Malmö Breast ImaginG database: objectives and development.

Purpose: We describe the design and implementation of the Malmö Breast ImaginG (M-BIG) database, which will support research projects investigating various aspects of current and future breast cancer screening programs. Specifically, M-BIG will provide clinical data to:1.investigate the effect of breast cancer screening on breast cancer prognosis and mortality;2.develop and validate the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in breast image interpretation; and3.develop and validate image-based radiological breast cancer risk profiles. Approach: The M-BIG database is intended to include a wide range of digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) examinations performed on women at the Mammography Clinic in Malmö, Sweden, from the introduction of DM in 2004 through 2020. Subjects may be included multiple times and for diverse reasons. The image data are linked to extensive clinical, diagnostic, and demographic data from several registries. Results: To date, the database contains a total of 451,054 examinations from 104,791 women. During the inclusion period, 95,258 unique women were screened. A total of 19,968 examinations were performed using DBT, whereas the rest used DM. Conclusions: We describe the design and implementation of the M-BIG database as a representative and accessible medical image database linked to various types of medical data. Work is ongoing to add features and curate the existing data.

Artificial Intelligence Detection of Missed Cancers at Digital Mammography That Were Detected at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

PURPOSE: To investigate how an artificial intelligence (AI) system performs at digital mammography (DM) from a screening population with ground truth defined by digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and whether AI could detect breast cancers at DM that had originally only been detected at DBT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this secondary analysis of data from a prospective study, DM examinations from 14 768 women (mean age, 57 years), examined with both DM and DBT with independent double reading in the MalmÓ§ Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST) (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01091545; data collection, 2010-2015), were analyzed with an AI system. Of 136 screening-detected cancers, 95 cancers were detected at DM and 41 cancers were detected only at DBT. The system identifies suspicious areas in the image, scored 1-100, and provides a risk score of 1 to 10 for the whole examination. A cancer was defined as AI detected if the cancer lesion was correctly localized and scored at least 62 (threshold determined by the AI system developers), therefore resulting in the highest examination risk score of 10. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and detection performance was analyzed with receiver operating characteristics. RESULTS: The highest examination risk score was assigned to 10% (1493 of 14 786) of the examinations. With 90.8% specificity, the AI system detected 75% (71 of 95) of the DM-detected cancers and 44% (18 of 41) of cancers at DM that had originally been detected only at DBT. The majority were invasive cancers (17 of 18). CONCLUSION: Almost half of the additional DBT-only screening-detected cancers in the MBTST were detected at DM with AI. AI did not reach double reading performance; however, if combined with double reading, AI has the potential to achieve a substantial portion of the benefit of DBT screening.Keywords: Computer-aided Diagnosis, Mammography, Breast, Diagnosis, Classification, Application DomainClinical trial registration no. NCT01091545© RSNA, 2021.

Bacterial interactions in the nasopharynx - effects of host factors in children attending day-care centers.

The nasopharynges of preschool children are often colonized by potentially pathogenic bacteria. The interactions between these common pathogens and certain host factors were investigated in healthy preschool children 1-6 years of age. Nasopharynx samples were collected from all 63 children attending a day-care center that experienced an outbreak of penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. The samples were analyzed for S. pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, and Group A Streptococci. A model for the risk of carrying these bacteria was established using logistic regression. S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae antagonize each other, whereas M. catarrhalis and S. pneumoniae have a positively association. The risk of carrying M. catarrhalis decreases with age. The time spent in day care each week was not shown to influence the rate of carriage of any of these pathogens. The negative effect of H. influenzae on S. pneumoniae is discussed in relation to the carriage of penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae, and possible mechanisms involved in this interaction are presented.