News | Artificial Intelligence | May 21, 2024

In a new study of nearly 5,000 screening mammograms interpreted by an FDA-approved AI algorithm, patient characteristics such as race and age influenced false positive results. The study’s results, “Patient Characteristics Impact Performance of AI Algorithm in Interpreting Negative Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Studies” were published today in the RSNA journal Radiology.

According to a newly-published study of nearly 5,000 screening mammograms interpreted by an FDA-approved AI algorithm, patient characteristics such as race and age influenced false positive results.

In a newly-published study of nearly 5,000 screening mammograms interpreted by an FDA-approved AI algorithm, patient characteristics such as race and age influenced false positive results. The study’s results, “Patient Characteristics Impact Performance of AI Algorithm in Interpreting Negative Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Studies” were published today in the RSNA journal Radiology. Image courtesy: RSNA Radiology (Nguyen, DL and Ren, Y et al)


May 21, 2024 — According to a newly-published study of nearly 5,000 screening mammograms interpreted by an FDA-approved AI algorithm, patient characteristics such as race and age influenced false positive results. The study’s results, “Patient Characteristics Impact Performance of AI Algorithm in Interpreting Negative Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Studies” were published today in Radiology, a journal of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA).

“AI has become a resource for radiologists to improve their efficiency and accuracy in reading screening mammograms while mitigating reader burnout,” said Derek L. Nguyen, M.D., Duke Health, breast radiologist and assistant professor at Duke University in Durham, NC. “However, the impact of patient characteristics on AI performance has not been well studied,” added Nguyen.

Key Results

- In a retrospective study including 4855 breast screening patients, false-positive case scores were more likely in Black patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5) and less likely in Asian patients (OR = 0.7) compared with White patients.

- False-positive risk scores were more likely in Black patients (OR = 1.5) and patients with extremely dense breasts (OR = 2.8) compared with White patients and patients with fatty density breasts, respectively.

- The influence of patient characteristics on algorithm performance necessitates more demographically diverse data sets for testing and training and greater transparency.

In a written summary of the findings issued by RSNA, Nguyen said while preliminary data suggests that AI algorithms applied to screening mammography exams may improve radiologists’ diagnostic performance for breast cancer detection and reduce interpretation time, there are some aspects of AI to be aware of.

“There are few demographically diverse databases for AI algorithm training, and the FDA does not require diverse datasets for validation,” Nguyen said, adding: “Because of the differences among patient populations, it’s important to investigate whether AI software can accommodate and perform at the same level for different patient ages, races and ethnicities.”

Collaborating with Nguyen were Lars J. Grimm, M.D., M.S.,  and Joseph Y. Lo, PhD, both with Duke University School of Medicine Department of Radidology; Tyler M. Jones, B.S., Duke University Pratt School of Engineering; Samantha M. Thomas, M.S., Duke University Department of Biostastics and Bioinformatics, and for iCAD Senior Research Scientist, Yinhao Ren, Ph.D.

AI Breast Imaging Study Details

In the retrospective study, researchers identified patients with negative (no evidence of cancer) digital breast tomosynthesis screening examinations performed at Duke University Medical Center between 2016 and 2019. All patients were followed for a two-year period after the screening mammograms, and no patients were diagnosed with a breast malignancy.

The researchers randomly selected a subset of this group consisting of 4,855 patients (median age 54 years) broadly distributed across four ethnic/racial groups. The subset included 1,316 (27%) white, 1,261 (26%) Black, 1,351 (28%) Asian, and 927 (19%) Hispanic patients.

A commercially available AI algorithm interpreted each exam in the subset of mammograms, generating both a case score (or certainty of malignancy) and a risk score (or one-year subsequent malignancy risk).

“Our goal was to evaluate whether an AI algorithm’s performance was uniform across age, breast density types and different patient race/ethnicities,” Nguyen said.

Given all mammograms in the study were negative for the presence of cancer, anything flagged as suspicious by the algorithm was considered a false positive result. False positive case scores were significantly more likely in Black and older patients (71-80 years) and less likely in Asian patients and younger patients (41-50 years) compared to white patients and women between the ages of 51 and 60.

“This study is important because it highlights that any AI software purchased by a healthcare institution may not perform equally across all patient ages, races/ethnicities and breast densities,” Nguyen said. Notably, he added, “Moving forward, I think AI software upgrades should focus on ensuring demographic diversity.”

Nguyen said healthcare institutions should understand the patient population they serve before purchasing an AI algorithm for screening mammogram interpretation and ask vendors about their algorithm training.

“Having a baseline knowledge of your institution’s demographics and asking the vendor about the ethnic and age diversity of their training data will help you understand the limitations you’ll face in clinical practice,” he said. 

More information: www.rsna.org

Reference: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.232286


Related Content

News | Breast Imaging

Nov. 17, 2025 — RadNet, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, DeepHealth have announced results from the largest real ...

Time November 17, 2025
arrow
News | Radiology Business

Nov. 13, 2025 — Covera Health recently announced that Advanced Radiology Services (ARS) has joined its national Quality ...

Time November 17, 2025
arrow
News | Radiology Imaging

Nov. 13, 2025 — Medical imaging AI company Avicenna.AI has launched AVI, a new platform that delivers AI results ...

Time November 13, 2025
arrow
News | Radiology Business

Nov. 12, 2025 — Siemens has announced plans to deconsolidate its remaining stake in Siemens Healthineers (currently ...

Time November 13, 2025
arrow
News | Radiopharmaceuticals and Tracers

Nov. 11, 2025 — The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) has released a position paper outlining ...

Time November 12, 2025
arrow
News | Orthopedic Imaging

Nov.10, 2025 — Medical imaging technology company Adaptix Ltd. has received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug ...

Time November 11, 2025
arrow
News | Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)

Nov. 10, 2025 — There has been substantial progress in the past few years in the field of MRI in general and remote MR ...

Time November 11, 2025
arrow
News | RSNA 2025

Nov. 7, 2025 — Coreline Soft will introduce its chest AI platform AVIEW 2.0 at RSNA 2025 (Nov. 30 – Dec. 4, Chicago) ...

Time November 10, 2025
arrow
News | Contrast Media

Nov. 10, 2025 — Scientists at the University of Birmingham have developed a new class of MRI contrast agents – improving ...

Time November 10, 2025
arrow
Feature | Teleradiology | Kyle Hardner

Once viewed as a solution for after-hours coverage, teleradiology is rapidly expanding into a critical part of radiology ...

Time November 06, 2025
arrow
Subscribe Now