Aug 2026· Academic Radiology· 0 citations· 19 references
Medicine
TL;DR
While AI offers a safety net for visible cancers, supplemental screening remains necessary for mammographically occult and true interval cancers.
Abstract
Rationale
AND
Objectives
Interval breast cancers (IBCs) occur after false-negative (FN) screening mammograms and can be diagnostically challenging. This study classified IBCs by retrospective visibility, evaluated an artificial intelligence (AI) tool's ability to detect IBCs, and identified factors associated with detection. MATERIALS AND
Methods
This retrospective study of 211,517 screening mammograms (2013-2020) included 96 IBCs diagnosed within a year of a negative/benign exam. Two radiologists independently classified IBC retrospective visibility; a third resolved discordant cases. Cohen's kappa assessed inter-reader agreement. A Food and Drug Administration-approved AI tool scored FN mammograms at the lesion level. Associations with AI detection were analyzed using chi-square/Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression.
Results
AI detected 40% (38/96) of IBCs, including 81% (34/42) retrospectively visible and 7% (4/54) not visible (p < 0.005). Interreader agreement was substantial (kappa = 0.69). Nearly all misses (91%, 10/11), all minimal actionable findings (100%, 13/13), and most minimal nonactionable findings (61%, 11/18) were detected by AI. True interval (0%, 0/14), mammographically occult (10%, 4/39), and technical misses (0%, 0/1) were rarely detected. On univariate analysis, AI detection was significantly associated with retrospective visibility (odds ratio [OR] 53.1, p < 0.001), symptomatic presentation (OR 8.1, p = 0.007), ultrasound-guided biopsy (OR 5.7, p = 0.027), and higher T stage (OR 3.4, p = 0.005).
Conclusion
AI detected most retrospectively visible IBCs but had limited performance for cancers not visible. AI detection was associated with visibility, presentation, biopsy modality, and T stage. While AI offers a safety net for visible cancers, supplemental screening remains necessary for mammographically occult and true interval cancers.
Purpose To classify the causes and pathologic characteristics of false-negative screening digital breast tomosynthesis examinations. Materials and Methods All false-negative screening examinations at a single center from March 1, 2019, through December 31, 2023, were collected. Seven fellowship-trained breast radiologi...
Lars J. Grimm, Victoria A. Wells, Jay A. Baker et al.· Radiology: Imaging Cancer· 0 citations
Purpose To compare artificial intelligence–based breast cancer detection and short-term breast cancer risk prediction models in their intended and nonintended settings over a single mammography screening round. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, the Cohort of Screen-Age Women–Case Control dataset from S...
Yao-Kuan Wang, L. Cockmartin, Tobias Wagner et al.· Radiology: Imaging Cancer· 0 citations
To evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm on three different mammography devices and assess screening performance using general and device-specific thresholds. This retrospective study analyzed 22,673 AI-assessed mammographies of women aged 50–69 collected in 2022–2023 from three mammography devices across...
Marcel Blum, R. Morant, Alena Eichenberger et al.· Insights into Imaging· 0 citations
Early and accurate diagnosis of breast cancer has a direct bearing on patient survival, yet interpretation of fine needle aspirate (FNA) imaging features still depends heavily on clinician experience and remains subject to inter-observer disagreement. This paper presents an empirical case study evaluating two supervise...
Abdul Aziz· Street Art & Urban Creat...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.