0 0

Cited 0 times in

Cited 0 times in

AI-CAD for diagnostic mammography: comparison to radiologists according to different indications

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorLee, Si Eun-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Hye Sun-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Vivian Youngjean-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Min Jung-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Eun-Kyung-
dc.contributor.authorYoon, Jung Hyun-
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-22T02:31:04Z-
dc.date.available2026-01-22T02:31:04Z-
dc.date.created2026-01-16-
dc.date.issued2025-12-
dc.identifier.issn0938-7994-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/210164-
dc.description.abstractObjectiveA lthough artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) is increasingly applied in screening mammography, its use in diagnostic settings is less established. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of AI-CAD abnormality scores at optimized thresholds across various diagnostic indications vs radiologists. Materials and methods This retrospective study included 1534 women (mean age, 51.4 +/- 8.8 years) who underwent diagnostic mammography between March 2015 and February 2016. Cases were categorized into three diagnostic indications: (1) symptomatic, (2) BI-RADS 3 follow-up, and (3) referral for abnormal imaging. A commercially available AI-CAD system provided abnormality scores (0-100%). Final diagnosis was confirmed by pathology or >= 2-year imaging stability. AI-CAD performance (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and AUC was evaluated at two thresholds: vendor-recommended 10% for screening and an optimized 50% from ROC analysis (Youden&apos;s index), and compared with original radiologist interpretations. Results Among the 1534 patients, 397 (25.9%) were diagnosed with breast cancer. At the 50% threshold, AI-CAD showed significantly higher specificity (95.0% vs 86.2%), accuracy (91.7% vs 87.2%), and PPV (85.1% vs 69.5%) than radiologists (all p < 0.001). AUCs were comparable (AI-CAD: 0.886; radiologists: 0.882; p = 0.75). In symptomatic patients, AUC was significantly higher than radiologists (0.873 vs 0.815, p = 0.002); in BI-RADS 3 follow-ups and asymptomatic imaging-detected abnormalities, specificity was improved with a tradeoff in lower sensitivity. Conclusion AI-CAD demonstrated diagnostic performance comparable to radiologists in mammography and, at an optimized threshold, offered superior specificity, PPV, and accuracy. Especially in symptomatic patients, a higher threshold increased diagnostic performance without compromising sensitivity.Key PointsQuestionAI-CAD has the potential to be applied for diagnostic mammography by applying different thresholds.FindingsUsing an optimized threshold, AI-CAD demonstrated higher specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value compared to radiologists.Clinical relevanceWhen an optimized threshold is applied, AI-CAD shows comparable performance to radiologists, with higher specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value.-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherSpringer International-
dc.relation.isPartOfEUROPEAN RADIOLOGY-
dc.relation.isPartOfEUROPEAN RADIOLOGY-
dc.titleAI-CAD for diagnostic mammography: comparison to radiologists according to different indications-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLee, Si Eun-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLee, Hye Sun-
dc.contributor.googleauthorPark, Vivian Youngjean-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKim, Min Jung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKim, Eun-Kyung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYoon, Jung Hyun-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00330-025-12232-6-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00851-
dc.identifier.eissn1432-1084-
dc.identifier.pmid41444394-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00330-025-12232-6-
dc.subject.keywordBreast Neoplasms-
dc.subject.keywordDigital Mammography-
dc.subject.keywordDiagnosis (Computer-Assisted)-
dc.subject.keywordArtificial Intelligence-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, Si Eun-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, Hye Sun-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorPark, Vivian Youngjean-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Min Jung-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Eun-Kyung-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorYoon, Jung Hyun-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-105025976841-
dc.identifier.wosid001648686400001-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationEUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2025-12-
dc.identifier.rimsid91008-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorBreast Neoplasms-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorDigital Mammography-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorDiagnosis (Computer-Assisted)-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorArtificial Intelligence-
dc.type.docTypeArticle; Early Access-
dc.description.isOpenAccessN-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscie-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryRadiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaRadiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Yonsei Biomedical Research Center (연세의생명연구원) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.