From: Artificial intelligence in mammographic phenotyping of breast cancer risk: a narrative review
Study | Model development dataset | Model design | Model performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Image format | # images (# women) | Vendors (# sites) | Model architecture | Output density measure | Density maps | ||
Roth et al. [35] | FFDM (Processed) | 109,849 images (N/R) | N/R (7 sites) | DenseNet-121 | BI-RADS density | No | Four-class K = 0.62–0.77 |
Dontchos et al. [25] | FFDM (Processed) | N/R (2174 women) | Hologic (1 site) | ResNet-18 | BI-RADS density (13 interpreting radiologists) | No | Dense versus non-dense Acc: 94.9% (academic radiologists) 90.7% (community radiologists) |
Matthews et al. [26] | FFDM (Processed) and SM | FFDM: 750,752 images (57,492 women) SM: 78,445 images (11,399 women) | Hologic (2 sites) | ResNet-34 | BI-RADS density (11 interpreting radiologists) | No | Four-class K = 0.72 for FFDM, Site 1 Four-class K = 0.72 for SM, Site 1 Four-class K = 0.79 for SM, Site 2 |
Saffari et al. [27] | FFDM | 410 images (115 women) | Siemens (1 site) | cGAN, CNN | BI-RADS density | Yes | DSC = 98% in dense tissue segmentation |
Deng et al. [28] | FFDM | 18,157 images (women) | Hologic (1 site) | SE-Attention CNN | BI-RADS density | No | Acc = 92.17% |
Perez Benito et al. [29] | FFDM (Processed) | 6680 images (1785 women) | Fujifilm, Hologic, Siemens, GE, IMS (11 sites) | ECNN | BI-RADS density (2 interpreting radiologists) | Yes | DSC = 0.77 |
Chang et al. [30] | FFDM (Raw) | 108,230 images (21,759 women) | GE, Kodak, Fischer (33 sites) | ResNet-50 | BI-RADS density (92 interpreting radiologists) | No | Four-class K = 0.67 |
Ciritsis et al. [31] | FFDM | 20,578 images (5221 women) | N/R (1 site) | CNN | BI-RADS density (consensus of 2 interpreting radiologists) | No | AUC = 0.98 for MLO views AUC = 0.97 for CC views |
Lehman et al. [32] | FFDM (Processed) | 58,894 images (39,272 women) | Hologic (1 site) | ResNet-18* | BI-RADS density (12 interpreting radiologists) | No | Four-class K = 0.67 |
Mohamed et al. [33] | FFDM (Processed) | 22,000 images (1427 women) | Hologic (1 site) | CNN AlexNet | BI-RADS density | No | AUC = 0.94 |
Mohamed et al. [34] | FFDM (Processed) | 15,415 images (963 women) | Hologic (1 site) | CNN AlexNet | BI-RADS density | No | AUC = 0.95 for MLO views AUC = 0.88 for CC views |
Haji Maghsoudi et al. [38] | FFDM (Raw) | 15,661 images (4437 women) | Hologic (2 Sites) | U-net* | APD% | Yes | DSC = 92.5% in breast segmentation APDdiff = 4.2–4.9% |
Li et al. [37] | FFDM (Raw) | 661 images (444 women) | GE (1 site) | CNN | APD% | Yes | DSC = 76% in dense tissue segmentation |
Kallenberg et al. [36] | FFDM (Raw) | N/R (493 women) | Hologic (1 site) | CSAE | APD% | Yes | DSC = 63% in dense tissue segmentation |