Search

Purpose: To develop and validate an automated software analysis method for mammography image quality assessment of the American College of Radiology (ACR) digital mammography (DM) phantom images., Methods: Twenty-seven DICOM images were acquired using Fuji mammography systems. All images were evaluated by three expert medical physicists using the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) mammography quality control guideline. To enhance the robustness and sensitivity assessment of our algorithm, an additional set of 12 images from a Hologic mammography system was included to test various phantom positional adjustments. The software automatically chose multiple regions of interest (ROIs) for analysis. A template matching method was primarily used for image analysis, followed by an additional method that locates and scores each target object (speck groups, fibers, and masses)., Results: The software performance shows a good to excellent agreement with the average scoring of observers (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] of 0.75, 0.79, 0.82 for speck groups, fibers, and masses, respectively). No significant differences were found in the scoring of target objects between human observers and the software. Both methods achieved scores meeting the pass criteria for speck groups and masses. Expert observers allocated lower scores to fiber objects, with diameters less than 0.61 mm, when compared to the software. The software was able to accurately score objects when the phantom position changed by up to 25 mm laterally, up to 5 degrees rotation, and overhanging the chest wall edge by up to 15 mm., Conclusions: Automated software analysis is a feasible method that may help improve the consistency and reproducibility of mammography image quality assessment with reduced reliance on human interaction and processing time., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Although the value of adding AI as a surrogate second reader in various scenarios has been investigated, it is unknown whether implementing an AI tool within double reading practice would capture additional subtle cancers missed by both radiologists who independently assessed the mammograms. This paper assesses the effectiveness of two state-of-the-art Artificial Intelligence (AI) models in detecting retrospectively-identified missed cancers within a screening program employing double reading practices. The study also explores the agreement between AI and radiologists in locating the lesions, considering various levels of concordance among the radiologists in locating the lesions. The Globally-aware Multiple Instance Classifier (GMIC) and Global-Local Activation Maps (GLAM) models were fine-tuned for our dataset. We evaluated the sensitivity of both models on missed cancers retrospectively identified by a panel of three radiologists who reviewed prior examinations of 729 cancer cases detected in a screening program with double reading practice. Two of these experts annotated the lesions, and based on their concordance levels, cases were categorized as 'almost perfect,' 'substantial,' 'moderate,' and 'poor.' We employed Similarity or Histogram Intersection (SIM) and Kullback-Leibler Divergence (KLD) metrics to compare saliency maps of malignant cases from the AI model with annotations from radiologists in each category. In total, 24.82% of cancers were labeled as "missed." The performance of GMIC and GLAM on the missed cancer cases was 82.98% and 79.79%, respectively, while for the true screen-detected cancers, the performances were 89.54% and 87.25%, respectively (p-values for the difference in sensitivity < 0.05). As anticipated, SIM and KLD from saliency maps were best in 'almost perfect,' followed by 'substantial,' 'moderate,' and 'poor.' Both GMIC and GLAM (p-values < 0.05) exhibited greater sensitivity at higher concordance. Even in a screening program with independent double reading, adding AI could potentially identify missed cancers. However, the challenging-to-locate lesions for radiologists impose a similar challenge for AI., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The information captured by the gist signal, which refers to radiologists' first impression arising from an initial global image processing, is poorly understood. We examined whether the gist signal can provide complementary information to data captured by radiologists (experiment 1), or computer algorithms (experiment 2) based on detailed mammogram inspection. In the first experiment, 19 radiologists assessed a case set twice, once based on a half-second image presentation (i.e., gist signal) and once in the usual viewing condition. Their performances in two viewing conditions were compared using repeated measure correlation (rm-corr). The cancer cases (19 cases × 19 readers) exhibited non-significant trend with rm-corr = 0.012 (p = 0.82, CI: -0.09, 0.12). For normal cases (41 cases × 19 readers), a weak correlation of rm-corr = 0.238 (p < 0.001, CI: 0.17, 0.30) was found. In the second experiment, we combined the abnormality score from a state-of-the-art deep learning-based tool (DL) with the radiological gist signal using a support vector machine (SVM). To obtain the gist signal, 53 radiologists assessed images based on half-second image presentation. The SVM performance for each radiologist and an average reader, whose gist responses were the mean abnormality scores given by all 53 readers to each image was assessed using leave-one-out cross-validation. For the average reader, the AUC for gist, DL, and the SVM, were 0.76 (CI: 0.62-0.86), 0.79 (CI: 0.63-0.89), and 0.88 (CI: 0.79-0.94). For all readers with a gist AUC significantly better than chance-level, the SVM outperformed DL. The gist signal provided malignancy evidence with no or weak associations with the information captured by humans in normal radiologic reporting, which involves detailed mammogram inspection. Adding gist signal to a state-of-the-art deep learning-based tool improved its performance for the breast cancer detection., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Variations in the performance of radiologists reading mammographic images are well reported, but key parameters explaining such variations in different countries are not fully explored. The main aim of this study is to investigate performances of Chinese (Hong Kong SAR and Guangdong Province) and Australian radiologists in interpreting dense breast mammographic images., Methods: A test set, contained 60 mammographic examinations with high breast density, was used to assess radiologists' performance. Twelve Chinese and thirteen Australian radiologists read all the cases independently and were asked to identify all lesions and provide a grade from 1 to 5 to each lesion. Case sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, AUC and JAFROC were used to assess radiologists' performances. Demographic information and reading experience were also collected from the readers. Performance scores were compared between the two populations and the relationships between performance scores and their reading experience were discovered., Results: For radiologists who were less than 40-year-old, lesion sensitivity, AUC and JAFROC were significantly lower in Chinese radiologists than those in Australian (52.10% vs 71.45%, p=0.043; 0.76 vs 0.84, p=0.031; 0.59 vs 0.72, p=0.045; respectively). Australian radiologists with less than 10 years of reading experience had higher AUC and JAFROC scores compared with their Chinese counterparts (0.83 vs 0.76, p=0.039; 0.70 vs 0.56, p=0.020, respectively)., Conclusions: We found that younger Australian radiologists performed better at reading dense breast cases which is likely to be linked to intensive fellowship training, immersion in a screening program and exposure to the benefits of a performance-measuring education tool.

Objective: The purpose of this article is to review different x-ray phase-contrast breast imaging techniques and their potential application in clinical settings., Conclusion: Phase-contrast imaging depicts not only the absorption contrast but also the refraction contrast of the transmitted x-ray beam. Early data suggest that this new modality may overcome some of the diagnostic limitations associated with current clinically available mammography systems and that it has potential for improving breast cancer detection.