Showing papers on "Mammography published in 2019"

Deep Learning to Improve Breast Cancer Detection on Screening Mammography

Abstract: The rapid development of deep learning, a family of machine learning techniques, has spurred much interest in its application to medical imaging problems. Here, we develop a deep learning algorithm that can accurately detect breast cancer on screening mammograms using an "end-to-end" training approach that efficiently leverages training datasets with either complete clinical annotation or only the cancer status (label) of the whole image. In this approach, lesion annotations are required only in the initial training stage, and subsequent stages require only image-level labels, eliminating the reliance on rarely available lesion annotations. Our all convolutional network method for classifying screening mammograms attained excellent performance in comparison with previous methods. On an independent test set of digitized film mammograms from the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (CBIS-DDSM), the best single model achieved a per-image AUC of 0.88, and four-model averaging improved the AUC to 0.91 (sensitivity: 86.1%, specificity: 80.1%). On an independent test set of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) images from the INbreast database, the best single model achieved a per-image AUC of 0.95, and four-model averaging improved the AUC to 0.98 (sensitivity: 86.7%, specificity: 96.1%). We also demonstrate that a whole image classifier trained using our end-to-end approach on the CBIS-DDSM digitized film mammograms can be transferred to INbreast FFDM images using only a subset of the INbreast data for fine-tuning and without further reliance on the availability of lesion annotations. These findings show that automatic deep learning methods can be readily trained to attain high accuracy on heterogeneous mammography platforms, and hold tremendous promise for improving clinical tools to reduce false positive and false negative screening mammography results. Code and model available at: https://github.com/lishen/end2end-all-conv .

A Deep Learning Mammography-based Model for Improved Breast Cancer Risk Prediction

Abstract: Background Mammographic density improves the accuracy of breast cancer risk models. However, the use of breast density is limited by subjective assessment, variation across radiologists, and restricted data. A mammography-based deep learning (DL) model may provide more accurate risk prediction. Purpose To develop a mammography-based DL breast cancer risk model that is more accurate than established clinical breast cancer risk models. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 88 994 consecutive screening mammograms in 39 571 women between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2012. For each patient, all examinations were assigned to either training, validation, or test sets, resulting in 71 689, 8554, and 8751 examinations, respectively. Cancer outcomes were obtained through linkage to a regional tumor registry. By using risk factor information from patient questionnaires and electronic medical records review, three models were developed to assess breast cancer risk within 5 years: a risk-factor-based logistic regression model (RF-LR) that used traditional risk factors, a DL model (image-only DL) that used mammograms alone, and a hybrid DL model that used both traditional risk factors and mammograms. Comparisons were made to an established breast cancer risk model that included breast density (Tyrer-Cuzick model, version 8 [TC]). Model performance was compared by using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) with DeLong test (P < .05). Results The test set included 3937 women, aged 56.20 years ± 10.04. Hybrid DL and image-only DL showed AUCs of 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66, 0.75) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.73), respectively. RF-LR and TC showed AUCs of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.72) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.57, 0.66), respectively. Hybrid DL showed a significantly higher AUC (0.70) than TC (0.62; P < .001) and RF-LR (0.67; P = .01). Conclusion Deep learning models that use full-field mammograms yield substantially improved risk discrimination compared with the Tyrer-Cuzick (version 8) model. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Sitek and Wolfe in this issue.

Breast MRI: State of the Art

Abstract: MRI of the breast has the highest sensitivity for breast cancer detection among current clinical imaging modalities and is indispensable for breast imaging practice. While the basis of breast MRI consists of T1-weighted contrast-enhanced imaging, T2-weighted, ultrafast, and diffusion-weighted imaging may be used to improve lesion characterization. Such multiparametric assessment of breast lesions allows for excellent discrimination between benign and malignant breast lesions. Indications for breast MRI are expanding. In preoperative staging, multiple studies confirm the superiority of MRI to other imaging modalities for tumor size estimation and detection of additional tumor foci in the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. Ongoing studies show that in experienced hands this can be used to improve breast cancer surgery, although there is no evidence of improved long-term outcomes. Screening indications are likewise growing as evidence is accumulating that OncologicRI depicts cancers at an earlier stage than mammography in all women. To manage the associated costs for screening, the use of abbreviated protocols may be beneficial. In patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, MRI is used to document response. It is essential to realize that oncologic and surgical response are different, and evaluation should be adapted to the underlying question.

Stand-Alone Artificial Intelligence for Breast Cancer Detection in Mammography: Comparison With 101 Radiologists.

Abstract: Background Artificial intelligence (AI) systems performing at radiologist-like levels in the evaluation of digital mammography (DM) would improve breast cancer screening accuracy and efficiency. We aimed to compare the stand-alone performance of an AI system to that of radiologists in detecting breast cancer in DM. Methods Nine multi-reader, multi-case study datasets previously used for different research purposes in seven countries were collected. Each dataset consisted of DM exams acquired with systems from four different vendors, multiple radiologists' assessments per exam, and ground truth verified by histopathological analysis or follow-up, yielding a total of 2652 exams (653 malignant) and interpretations by 101 radiologists (28 296 independent interpretations). An AI system analyzed these exams yielding a level of suspicion of cancer present between 1 and 10. The detection performance between the radiologists and the AI system was compared using a noninferiority null hypothesis at a margin of 0.05. Results The performance of the AI system was statistically noninferior to that of the average of the 101 radiologists. The AI system had a 0.840 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.820 to 0.860) area under the ROC curve and the average of the radiologists was 0.814 (95% CI = 0.787 to 0.841) (difference 95% CI = -0.003 to 0.055). The AI system had an AUC higher than 61.4% of the radiologists. Conclusions The evaluated AI system achieved a cancer detection accuracy comparable to an average breast radiologist in this retrospective setting. Although promising, the performance and impact of such a system in a screening setting needs further investigation.

Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue

Abstract: Background: Extremely dense breast tissue is a risk factor for breast cancer and limits the detection of cancer with mammography. Data are needed on the use of supplemental magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to improve early detection and reduce interval breast cancers in such patients. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in the Netherlands, we assigned 40,373 women between the ages of 50 and 75 years with extremely dense breast tissue and normal results on screening mammography to a group that was invited to undergo supplemental MRI or to a group that received mammography screening only. The groups were assigned in a 1:4 ratio, with 8061 in the MRI-invitation group and 32,312 in the mammography-only group. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the incidence of interval cancers during a 2-year screening period. Results: The interval-cancer rate was 2.5 per 1000 screenings in the MRI-invitation group and 5.0 per 1000 screenings in the mammography-only group, for a difference of 2.5 per 1000 screenings (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 3.7; P<0.001). Of the women who were invited to undergo MRI, 59% accepted the invitation. Of the 20 interval cancers that were diagnosed in the MRI-invitation group, 4 were diagnosed in the women who actually underwent MRI (0.8 per 1000 screenings) and 16 in those who did not accept the invitation (4.9 per 1000 screenings). The MRI cancer-detection rate among the women who actually underwent MRI screening was 16.5 per 1000 screenings (95% CI, 13.3 to 20.5). The positive predictive value was 17.4% (95% CI, 14.2 to 21.2) for recall for additional testing and 26.3% (95% CI, 21.7 to 31.6) for biopsy. The false positive rate was 79.8 per 1000 screenings. Among the women who underwent MRI, 0.1% had either an adverse event or a serious adverse event during or immediately after the screening. Conclusions: The use of supplemental MRI screening in women with extremely dense breast tissue and normal results on mammography resulted in the diagnosis of significantly fewer interval cancers than mammography alone during a 2-year screening period. (Funded by the University Medical Center Utrecht and others.

Detection of Breast Cancer with Mammography: Effect of an Artificial Intelligence Support System

Abstract: Purpose To compare breast cancer detection performance of radiologists reading mammographic examinations unaided versus supported by an artificial intelligence (AI) system. Materials and Methods An enriched retrospective, fully crossed, multireader, multicase, HIPAA-compliant study was performed. Screening digital mammographic examinations from 240 women (median age, 62 years; range, 39-89 years) performed between 2013 and 2017 were included. The 240 examinations (100 showing cancers, 40 leading to false-positive recalls, 100 normal) were interpreted by 14 Mammography Quality Standards Act-qualified radiologists, once with and once without AI support. The readers provided a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System score and probability of malignancy. AI support provided radiologists with interactive decision support (clicking on a breast region yields a local cancer likelihood score), traditional lesion markers for computer-detected abnormalities, and an examination-based cancer likelihood score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), specificity and sensitivity, and reading time were compared between conditions by using mixed-models analysis dof variance and generalized linear models for multiple repeated measurements. Results On average, the AUC was higher with AI support than with unaided reading (0.89 vs 0.87, respectively; P = .002). Sensitivity increased with AI support (86% [86 of 100] vs 83% [83 of 100]; P = .046), whereas specificity trended toward improvement (79% [111 of 140]) vs 77% [108 of 140]; P = .06). Reading time per case was similar (unaided, 146 seconds; supported by AI, 149 seconds; P = .15). The AUC with the AI system alone was similar to the average AUC of the radiologists (0.89 vs 0.87). Conclusion Radiologists improved their cancer detection at mammography when using an artificial intelligence system for support, without requiring additional reading time. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. See also the editorial by Bahl in this issue.

Breast cancer detection using deep convolutional neural networks and support vector machines

Abstract: It is important to detect breast cancer as early as possible. In this manuscript, a new methodology for classifying breast cancer using deep learning and some segmentation techniques are introduced. A new computer aided detection (CAD) system is proposed for classifying benign and malignant mass tumors in breast mammography images. In this CAD system, two segmentation approaches are used. The first approach involves determining the region of interest (ROI) manually, while the second approach uses the technique of threshold and region based. The deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) is used for feature extraction. A well-known DCNN architecture named AlexNet is used and is fine-tuned to classify two classes instead of 1,000 classes. The last fully connected (fc) layer is connected to the support vector machine (SVM) classifier to obtain better accuracy. The results are obtained using the following publicly available datasets (1) the digital database for screening mammography (DDSM); and (2) the Curated Breast Imaging Subset of DDSM (CBIS-DDSM). Training on a large number of data gives high accuracy rate. Nevertheless, the biomedical datasets contain a relatively small number of samples due to limited patient volume. Accordingly, data augmentation is a method for increasing the size of the input data by generating new data from the original input data. There are many forms for the data augmentation; the one used here is the rotation. The accuracy of the new-trained DCNN architecture is 71.01% when cropping the ROI manually from the mammogram. The highest area under the curve (AUC) achieved was 0.88 (88%) for the samples obtained from both segmentation techniques. Moreover, when using the samples obtained from the CBIS-DDSM, the accuracy of the DCNN is increased to 73.6%. Consequently, the SVM accuracy becomes 87.2% with an AUC equaling to 0.94 (94%). This is the highest AUC value compared to previous work using the same conditions.

Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening.

Abstract: Multiple studies in the first decade of the 21st century have established contrast-enhanced breast MRI as a screening modality for women with a hereditary or familial increased risk for the development of breast cancer. In recent studies, in women with various risk profiles, the sensitivity ranges between 81% and 100%, which is approximately twice as high as the sensitivity of mammography. The specificity increases in follow-up rounds to around 97%, with positive predictive values for biopsy in the same range as for mammography. MRI preferentially detects the more aggressive/invasive types of breast cancer, but has a higher sensitivity than mammography for any type of cancer. This performance implies that in women screened with breast MRI, all other examinations must be regarded as supplemental. Mammography may yield ~5% additional cancers, mostly ductal carcinoma in situ, while slightly decreasing specificity and increasing the costs. Ultrasound has no supplemental value when MRI is used. Evidence is mounting that in other groups of women the performance of MRI is likewise superior to more conventional screening techniques. Particularly in women with a personal history of breast cancer, the gain seems to be high, but also in women with a biopsy history of lobular carcinoma in situ and even women at average risk, similar results are reported. Initial outcome studies show that breast MRI detects cancer earlier, which induces a stage-shift increasing the survival benefit of screening. Cost-effectiveness is still an issue, particularly for women at lower risk. Since costs of the MRI scan itself are a driving factor, efforts to reduce these costs are essential. The use of abbreviated MRI protocols may enable more widespread use of breast MRI for screening. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:377-390.

Artificial Intelligence for Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Current Concepts and Future Perspectives

Abstract: Although computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) is widely used in mammography, conventional CAD programs that use prompts to indicate potential cancers on the mammograms have not led to an improvement in diagnostic accuracy. Because of the advances in machine learning, especially with use of deep (multilayered) convolutional neural networks, artificial intelligence has undergone a transformation that has improved the quality of the predictions of the models. Recently, such deep learning algorithms have been applied to mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). In this review, the authors explain how deep learning works in the context of mammography and DBT and define the important technical challenges. Subsequently, they discuss the current status and future perspectives of artificial intelligence-based clinical applications for mammography, DBT, and radiomics. Available algorithms are advanced and approach the performance of radiologists-especially for cancer detection and risk prediction at mammography. However, clinical validation is largely lacking, and it is not clear how the power of deep learning should be used to optimize practice. Further development of deep learning models is necessary for DBT, and this requires collection of larger databases. It is expected that deep learning will eventually have an important role in DBT, including the generation of synthetic images.

Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Effects of Training Sample Size on Multi-Stage Transfer Learning Using Deep Neural Nets

Abstract: In this paper, we developed a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for the classification of malignant and benign masses in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) using a multi-stage transfer learning approach that utilized data from similar auxiliary domains for intermediate-stage fine-tuning. Breast imaging data from DBT, digitized screen-film mammography, and digital mammography totaling 4039 unique regions of interest (1797 malignant and 2242 benign) were collected. Using cross validation, we selected the best transfer network from six transfer networks by varying the level up to which the convolutional layers were frozen. In a single-stage transfer learning approach, knowledge from CNN trained on the ImageNet data was fine-tuned directly with the DBT data. In a multi-stage transfer learning approach, knowledge learned from ImageNet was first fine-tuned with the mammography data and then fine-tuned with the DBT data. Two transfer networks were compared for the second-stage transfer learning by freezing most of the CNN structures versus freezing only the first convolutional layer. We studied the dependence of the classification performance on training sample size for various transfer learning and fine-tuning schemes by varying the training data from 1% to 100% of the available sets. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used as a performance measure. The view-based AUC on the test set for single-stage transfer learning was 0.85 ± 0.05 and improved significantly ( ${p} ) to 0.91 ± 0.03 for multi-stage learning. This paper demonstrated that, when the training sample size from the target domain is limited, an additional stage of transfer learning using data from a similar auxiliary domain is advantageous.

Deep convolutional neural networks for mammography: advances, challenges and applications

Abstract: The limitations of traditional computer-aided detection (CAD) systems for mammography, the extreme importance of early detection of breast cancer and the high impact of the false diagnosis of patients drive researchers to investigate deep learning (DL) methods for mammograms (MGs). Recent breakthroughs in DL, in particular, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have achieved remarkable advances in the medical fields. Specifically, CNNs are used in mammography for lesion localization and detection, risk assessment, image retrieval, and classification tasks. CNNs also help radiologists providing more accurate diagnosis by delivering precise quantitative analysis of suspicious lesions. In this survey, we conducted a detailed review of the strengths, limitations, and performance of the most recent CNNs applications in analyzing MG images. It summarizes 83 research studies for applying CNNs on various tasks in mammography. It focuses on finding the best practices used in these research studies to improve the diagnosis accuracy. This survey also provides a deep insight into the architecture of CNNs used for various tasks. Furthermore, it describes the most common publicly available MG repositories and highlights their main features and strengths. The mammography research community can utilize this survey as a basis for their current and future studies. The given comparison among common publicly available MG repositories guides the community to select the most appropriate database for their application(s). Moreover, this survey lists the best practices that improve the performance of CNNs including the pre-processing of images and the use of multi-view images. In addition, other listed techniques like transfer learning (TL), data augmentation, batch normalization, and dropout are appealing solutions to reduce overfitting and increase the generalization of the CNN models. Finally, this survey identifies the research challenges and directions that require further investigations by the community.

The incidence of fatal breast cancer measures the increased effectiveness of therapy in women participating in mammography screening.

Abstract: Background Women and their health care providers need a reliable answer to this important question: If a woman chooses to participate in regular mammography screening, then how much will this choice improve her chances of avoiding a death from breast cancer compared with women who choose not to participate? Methods To answer this question, we used comprehensive registries for population, screening history, breast cancer incidence, and disease-specific death data in a defined population in Dalarna County, Sweden. The annual incidence of breast cancer was calculated along with the annual incidence of breast cancers that were fatal within 10 and within 11 to 20 years of diagnosis among women aged 40 to 69 years who either did or did not participate in mammography screening during a 39-year period (1977-2015). For an additional comparison, corresponding data are presented from 19 years of the prescreening period (1958-1976). All patients received stage-specific therapy according to the latest national guidelines, irrespective of the mode of detection. Results The benefit for women who chose to participate in an organized breast cancer screening program was a 60% lower risk of dying from breast cancer within 10 years after diagnosis (relative risk, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.48) and a 47% lower risk of dying from breast cancer within 20 years after diagnosis (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.63) compared with the corresponding risks for nonparticipants. Conclusions Although all patients with breast cancer stand to benefit from advances in breast cancer therapy, the current results demonstrate that women who have participated in mammography screening obtain a significantly greater benefit from the therapy available at the time of diagnosis than do those who have not participated.

Can we reduce the workload of mammographic screening by automatic identification of normal exams with artificial intelligence? A feasibility study

Abstract: Purpose To study the feasibility of automatically identifying normal digital mammography (DM) exams with artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce the breast cancer screening reading workload.

Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis in Breast Cancer Screening: The Oslo Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.

Abstract: Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is replacing digital mammography (DM) in the clinical workflow. Currently, there are limited prospective studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of both examinations and the role of synthetic mammography (SM) and computer-aided detection (CAD). Purpose To compare the accuracy of DM versus DM + DBT in population-based breast cancer screening. Materials and Methods This prospective study, performed from November 2010 to December 2012, included 24 301 women (mean age, 59.1 years ± 5.7 [standard deviation]) with 281 cancers, of which 51 were interval cancers. Each examination was independently interpreted with four reading modes: DM, DM + CAD, DM + DBT, and SM + DBT. Sensitivity and specificity were compared for DM versus DM + DBT, DM versus DM + CAD, DM + DBT versus SM + DBT, and DM versus DM + DBT at double reading. Reader-adjusted performance characteristics of reading modes were evaluated on the basis of pre-arbitration (initial interpretation) scores. Statistical analysis was based on cluster bootstrap analysis using 10 000 random resamples. Results Sensitivity was 54.1% (152 of 281) for DM and 70.5% (198 of 281) for DM + DBT. Reader-adjusted difference was 12.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2%, 19.7%; P = .001). Specificity was 94.2% (false-positive fraction [FPF], 5.8%; 1388 of 24 020) for DM and 95.0% (FPF, 5.0%; 1209/24 020) for DM + DBT, with a reader-adjusted difference in FPF of -1.2% (95% CI: -1.7%, -0.7%; P .2). Conclusion Addition of digital breast tomosynthesis to digital mammography resulted in significant gains in sensitivity and specificity. Synthetic mammography in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis had similar sensitivity and specificity to digital mammography in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Lang in this issue.

Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.

Abstract: For screening women at increased risk for breast cancer, the sensitivity of contrast agent–enhanced mammography was 87.5%, compared with 50.0% for digital mammography (P = .03), with a specificity ...

Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using annotation-efficient deep learning approach

Abstract: Breast cancer remains a global challenge, causing over 1 million deaths globally in 2018. To achieve earlier breast cancer detection, screening x-ray mammography is recommended by health organizations worldwide and has been estimated to decrease breast cancer mortality by 20-40%. Nevertheless, significant false positive and false negative rates, as well as high interpretation costs, leave opportunities for improving quality and access. To address these limitations, there has been much recent interest in applying deep learning to mammography; however, obtaining large amounts of annotated data poses a challenge for training deep learning models for this purpose, as does ensuring generalization beyond the populations represented in the training dataset. Here, we present an annotation-efficient deep learning approach that 1) achieves state-of-the-art performance in mammogram classification, 2) successfully extends to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT; "3D mammography"), 3) detects cancers in clinically-negative prior mammograms of cancer patients, 4) generalizes well to a population with low screening rates, and 5) outperforms five-out-of-five full-time breast imaging specialists by improving absolute sensitivity by an average of 14%. Our results demonstrate promise towards software that can improve the accuracy of and access to screening mammography worldwide.

Deep Learning for Breast Cancer Diagnosis from Mammograms-A Comparative Study.

Abstract: Deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are investigated in the context of computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) of breast cancer. State-of-the-art CNNs are trained and evaluated on two mammographic datasets, consisting of ROIs depicting benign or malignant mass lesions. The performance evaluation of each examined network is addressed in two training scenarios: the first involves initializing the network with pre-trained weights, while for the second the networks are initialized in a random fashion. Extensive experimental results show the superior performance achieved in the case of fine-tuning a pretrained network compared to training from scratch.

Breast density implications and supplemental screening

Abstract: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has been widely implemented in place of 2D mammography, although it is less effective in women with extremely dense breasts. Breast ultrasound detects additional early-stage, invasive breast cancers when combined with mammography; however, its relevant limitations, including the shortage of trained operators, operator dependence and small field of view, have limited its widespread implementation. Automated breast sonography (ABS) is a promising technique but the time to interpret and false-positive rates need to be improved. Supplemental screening with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in high-risk women reduces late-stage disease; abbreviated MRI protocols may reduce cost and increase accessibility to women of average risk with dense breasts. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and molecular breast imaging improve cancer detection but require further validation for screening and direct biopsy guidance should be implemented for any screening modality. This article reviews the status of screening women with dense breasts. KEY POINTS: • The sensitivity of mammography is reduced in women with dense breasts. Supplemental screening with US detects early-stage, invasive breast cancers. • Tomosynthesis reduces recall rate and increases cancer detection rate but is less effective in women with extremely dense breasts. • Screening MRI improves early diagnosis of breast cancer more than ultrasound and is currently recommended for women at high risk. Risk assessment is needed, to include breast density, to ascertain who should start early annual MRI screening.

Abbreviated MRI of the Breast: Does It Provide Value?

Abstract: MRI of the breast is the most sensitive test for breast cancer detection and outperforms conventional imaging with mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, or ultrasound. However, the long scan time and relatively high costs limit its widespread use. Hence, it is currently only routinely implemented in the screening of women at an increased risk of breast cancer. To overcome these limitations, abbreviated dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE)‐MRI protocols have been introduced that substantially shorten image acquisition and interpretation time while maintaining a high diagnostic accuracy. Efforts to develop abbreviated MRI protocols reflect the increasing scrutiny of the disproportionate contribution of radiology to the rising overall healthcare expenditures. Healthcare policy makers are now focusing on curbing the use of advanced imaging examinations such as MRI while continuing to promote the quality and appropriateness of imaging. An important cornerstone of value‐based healthcare defines value as the patient's outcome over costs. Therefore, the concept of a fast, abbreviated MRI exam is very appealing, given its high diagnostic accuracy coupled with the possibility of a marked reduction in the cost of an MRI examination. Given recent concerns about gadolinium‐based contrast agents, unenhanced MRI techniques such as diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) are also being investigated for breast cancer diagnosis. Although further larger prospective studies, standardized imaging protocol, and reproducibility studies are necessary, initial results with abbreviated MRI protocols suggest that it seems feasible to offer screening breast DCE‐MRI to a broader population. This article aims to give an overview of abbreviated and fast breast MRI protocols, their utility for breast cancer detection, and their emerging role in the new value‐based healthcare paradigm that has replaced the fee‐for‐service model. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:e85–e100.

Predicting Breast Cancer by Applying Deep Learning to Linked Health Records and Mammograms.

Abstract: Background Computational models on the basis of deep neural networks are increasingly used to analyze health care data. However, the efficacy of traditional computational models in radiology is a matter of debate. Purpose To evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of a combined machine and deep learning approach for early breast cancer detection applied to a linked set of digital mammography images and electronic health records. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, 52 936 images were collected in 13 234 women who underwent at least one mammogram between 2013 and 2017, and who had health records for at least 1 year before undergoing mammography. The algorithm was trained on 9611 mammograms and health records of women to make two breast cancer predictions: to predict biopsy malignancy and to differentiate normal from abnormal screening examinations. The study estimated the association of features with outcomes by using t test and Fisher exact test. The model comparisons were performed with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or by using the DeLong test. Results The resulting algorithm was validated in 1055 women and tested in 2548 women (mean age, 55 years ± 10 [standard deviation]). In the test set, the algorithm identified 34 of 71 (48%) false-negative findings on mammograms. For the malignancy prediction objective, the algorithm obtained an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.93), with specificity of 77.3% (95% CI: 69.2%, 85.4%) at a sensitivity of 87%. When trained on clinical data alone, the model performed significantly better than the Gail model (AUC, 0.78 vs 0.54, respectively; P < .004). Conclusion The algorithm, which combined machine-learning and deep-learning approaches, can be applied to assess breast cancer at a level comparable to radiologists and has the potential to substantially reduce missed diagnoses of breast cancer. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk

Abstract: The purpose of this review is to examine the most recent data and guidelines regarding screening for breast cancer in average risk women. The differing recommendations for screening reflect differences in value judgements between the benefits (decreased cancer-related death and morbidity) and the harms (potential for overdiagnosis, false positives, false negatives, anxiety, and cost of care) of breast cancer screening. There are multiple organizations with recommendations for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. All organizations recommend mammography to screen for breast cancer but differ in the age at which to initiate mammograms, screening interval, and the age at which to stop screening. The final decision regarding breast cancer screening should be individualized based on the patient’s needs and values and include shared decision-making.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the early detection of breast cancer: a scoping review to assess AI’s potential in breast screening practice

Abstract: Introduction: Various factors are driving interest in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) for breast cancer (BC) detection, but it is unclear whether the evidence warrants large-scale u...

Cancer prevention and screening: the next step in the era of precision medicine.

Abstract: A primary mode of cancer prevention and early detection in the United States is the widespread practice of screening. Although many strategies for early detection and prevention are available, adverse outcomes, such as overdiagnosis and overtreatment, are prevalent among those utilizing these approaches. Broad use of mammography and prostate cancer screening are key examples illustrating the potential harms stemming from the detection of indolent lesions and the subsequent overtreatment. Furthermore, there are several cancers for which prevention strategies do not currently exist. Clinical and experimental evidence have expanded our understanding of cancer initiation and progression, and have instructed the development of improved, precise modes of cancer prevention and early detection. Recent cancer prevention and early detection innovations have begun moving towards the integration of molecular knowledge and risk stratification profiles to allow for a more accurate representation of at-risk individuals. The future of cancer prevention and early detection efforts should emphasize the incorporation of precision cancer prevention integration where screening and cancer prevention regimens can be matched to one’s risk of cancer due to known genomic and environmental factors.

MRI versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women with familial risk (FaMRIsc): a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial

Abstract: Background: Approximately 15% of all breast cancers occur in women with a family history of breast cancer, but for whom no causative hereditary gene mutation has been found. Screening guidelines for women with familial risk of breast cancer differ between countries. We did a randomised controlled trial (FaMRIsc) to compare MRI screening with mammography in women with familial risk. Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled trial done in 12 hospitals in the Netherlands, women were eligible to participate if they were aged 30–55 years and had a cumulative lifetime breast cancer risk of at least 20% because of a familial predisposition, but were BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 wild-type. Participants who were breast-feeding, pregnant, had a previous breast cancer screen, or had a previous a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ were eligible, but those with a previously diagnosed invasive carcinoma were excluded. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either annual MRI and clinical breast examination plus biennial mammography (MRI group) or annual mammography and clinical breast examination (mammography group). Randomisation was done via a web-based system and stratified by centre. Women who did not provide consent for randomisation could give consent for registration if they followed either the mammography group protocol or the MRI group protocol in a joint decision with their physician. Results from the registration group were only used in the analyses stratified by breast density. Primary outcomes were number, size, and nodal status of detected breast cancers. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NL2661. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2017, 1355 women provided consent for randomisation and 231 for registration. 675 of 1355 women were randomly allocated to the MRI group and 680 to the mammography group. 218 of 231 women opting to be in a registration group were in the mammography registration group and 13 were in the MRI registration group. The mean number of screening rounds per woman was 4·3 (SD 1·76). More breast cancers were detected in the MRI group than in the mammography group (40 vs 15; p=0·0017). Invasive cancers (24 in the MRI group and eight in the mammography group) were smaller in the MRI group than in the mammography group (median size 9 mm [5–14] vs 17 mm [13–22]; p=0·010) and less frequently node positive (four [17%] of 24 vs five [63%] of eight; p=0·023). Tumour stages of the cancers detected at incident rounds were significantly earlier in the MRI group (12 [48%] of 25 in the MRI group vs one [7%] of 15 in the mammography group were stage T1a and T1b cancers; one (4%) of 25 in the MRI group and two (13%) of 15 in the mammography group were stage T2 or higher; p=0·035) and node-positive tumours were less frequent (two [11%] of 18 in the MRI group vs five [63%] of eight in the mammography group; p=0·014). All seven tumours stage T2 or higher were in the two highest breast density categories (breast imaging reporting and data system categories C and D; p=0·0077) One patient died from breast cancer during follow-up (mammography registration group). Interpretation: MRI screening detected cancers at an earlier stage than mammography. The lower number of late-stage cancers identified in incident rounds might reduce the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and decrease breast cancer-related mortality. However, the advantages of the MRI screening approach might be at the cost of more false-positive results, especially at high breast density. Funding: Dutch Government ZonMw, Dutch Cancer Society, A Sister's Hope, Pink Ribbon, Stichting Coolsingel, J&T Rijke Stichting.

Breast Microcalcification Diagnosis Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network from Digital Mammograms.

Abstract: Mammography is successfully used as an effective screening tool for cancer diagnosis. A calcification cluster on mammography is a primary sign of cancer. Early researches have proved the diagnostic value of the calcification, yet their performance is highly dependent on handcrafted image descriptors. Characterizing the calcification mammography in an automatic and robust way remains a challenge. In this paper, the calcification was characterized by descriptors obtained from deep learning and handcrafted descriptors. We compared the performances of different image feature sets on digital mammograms. The feature sets included the deep features alone, the handcrafted features, their combination, and the filtered deep features. Experimental results have demonstrated that the deep features outperform handcrafted features, but the handcrafted features can provide complementary information for deep features. We achieved a classification precision of 89.32% and sensitivity of 86.89% using the filtered deep features, which is the best performance among all the feature sets.

Improving early detection of breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: why mammography may not be the way forward.

Abstract: The prevention and control of breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is an increasingly critical public health issue. Breast cancer is the most frequent female cancer in SSA and mortality rates from this disease are the highest globally. Breast cancer has traditionally been considered a disease of high-income countries, and programs for early detection have been developed and implemented in these settings. However, screening programs for breast cancer in SSA have been less effective than in high-income countries. This article reviews the literature on breast cancer in SSA, focusing on early detection practices. It then examines the case for and against mammography and other early detection approaches for breast cancer in SSA. Women with breast cancer in SSA are younger compared with high-income countries. Most women present with advanced disease and because treatment options are limited, have poor prognoses. Delay between symptom onset and healthcare seeking is common. Engagement with early detection practices such as mammography and breast examination is low and contributes to late stage at diagnosis. While early detection of breast cancer through screening has contributed to important reductions in mortality in many high-income countries, most countries in SSA have not been able to implement and sustain screening programs due to financial, logistical and sociocultural constraints. Mammography is widely used in high-income countries but has several limitations in SSA and is likely to have a higher harm-to-benefit ratio. Breast self-examination and clinical breast examination are alternative early detection methods which are more widely used by women in SSA compared with mammography, and are less resource intensive. An alternative approach to breast cancer screening programs for SSA is clinical downstaging, where the focus is on detecting breast cancer earlier in symptomatic women. Evidence demonstrates effectiveness of clinical downstaging among women presenting with late stage disease. Approaches for early detection of breast cancer in SSA need to be context-specific. While screening programs with mammography have been effective in high-income countries, evidence suggests that other strategies might be equally important in reducing mortality from breast cancer, particularly in low-resource settings. There is a strong argument for further research into the feasability and acceptability of clinical downstaging for the control of breast cancer in SSA.

Diffusion-weighted MRI for Unenhanced Breast Cancer Screening.

Abstract: Diffusion-weighted (DW) MRI is a rapid technique that measures the mobility of water molecules within tissue, reflecting the cellular microenvironment. At DW MRI, breast cancers typically exhibit reduced diffusivity and appear hyperintense to surrounding tissues. On the basis of this characteristic, DW MRI may offer an unenhanced method to detect breast cancer without the costs and safety concerns associated with dynamic contrast material-enhanced MRI, the current reference standard in the setting of high-risk screening. This application of DW MRI has not been widely explored but is particularly timely given the growing health concerns related to the long-term use of gadolinium-based contrast material. Moreover, increasing breast density notification legislation across the United States is raising awareness of the limitations of mammography in women with dense breasts, emphasizing the need for additional cost-effective supplemental screening examinations. Preliminary studies suggest unenhanced MRI with DW MRI may provide higher sensitivity than screening mammography for the detection of breast malignancies. Larger prospective multicenter trials are needed to validate single-center findings and assess the performance of DW MRI for generalized breast cancer screening. Standardization of DW MRI acquisition and interpretation is essential to ensure reliable sensitivity and specificity, and an optimal approach for screening using readily available techniques is proposed here.