Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35066633›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

The diagnostic performance of ultrasound computer-aided diagnosis system for distinguishing breast masses: a prospective multicenter study.

Qi Wei, Yu-Jing Yan, Ge-Ge Wu, Xi-Rong Ye, Fan Jiang, Jie Liu, Gang Wang, Yi Wang, Juan Song, Zhi-Ping Pan and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03887598 (A Multi-center Study of Differential Diagnosis Breast Nodules by Ultrasound Artificial Intelligence and Ultrasound Elastography), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03887598 unknown statusnot on this map

A Multi-center Study of Differential Diagnosis Breast Nodules by Ultrasound Artificial Intelligence and Ultrasound Elastography

TypeobservationalSponsorXin-Wu CuiRan2019 to 2020Enrolled2,000ConditionsBreast CancerArmsUltrasound diagnosis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Errors in Radiology: A Standard Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Qi WeiDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1095, Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei Province, China.
Yu-Jing YanDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1095, Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei Province, China.
Ge-Ge WuDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1095, Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei Province, China.
Xi-Rong YeDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The Central Hospital of EDong Healthcare, Huangshi, 435000, Hubei Province, China.
Fan JiangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230601, Anhui Province, China.
Jie LiuDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Yichang General Hospital, Renmin Hospital of Three Gorges University, Hubei Province, Yichang, 443099, China.
Gang WangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Linhai, 318000, Zhejiang Province, China.
Yi WangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Macheng People's Hospital, Macheng, 438300, Hubei Province, China.
Juan SongDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Xiangyang No. 1 People's Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Medicine, Xiangyang, 441000, Hubei Province, China.
Zhi-Ping PanDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Yixing Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Yixing, 214200, Jiangsu Province, China.
Jin-Hua HuDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Anqing First People's Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Anqing, 246052, Anhui Province, China.
Chao-Ying JinDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Linhai, 318000, Zhejiang Province, China.
Xiang WangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Macheng People's Hospital, Macheng, 438300, Hubei Province, China.
Christoph F DietrichDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hirslanden Clinic, Schänzlihalde 11, 3013, Bern, Switzerland.
Xin-Wu CuiDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1095, Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei Province, China. cuixinwu@live.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3890-6660

Funding

Key R&D Projects of Science and Technology of Hubei Province in 2020 2020BCB022National Natural Science Foundation of China 82071953Tongji Hospital (HUST) Fundation for Excellent Young Scientist 2020YQ01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic value of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) software on ultrasound in distinguishing benign and malignant breast masses and avoiding unnecessary biopsy.

methodsThis prospective, multicenter study included patients who were scheduled for pathological diagnosis of breast masses between April 2019 and November 2020. Ultrasound images, videos, CAD analysis, and BI-RADS were obtained. The AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were calculated and compared with radiologists.

resultsOverall, 901 breast masses in 901 patients were enrolled in this study. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of CAD software were 89.6%, 94.2%, 87.0%, 80.4%, and 96.3, respectively, in the long-axis section; 89.0%, 91.4%, 87.7%, 80.8%, and 94.7%, respectively, in the short-axis section. With BI-RADS 4a as the cut-off value, CAD software has a higher AUC (0.906 vs 0.734 vs 0.696, all p < 0.001) than both experienced and less experienced radiologists. With BI-RADS 4b as the cut-off value, CAD software showed better AUC than less experienced radiologists (0.906 vs 0.874, p < 0.001), but not superior to experienced radiologists (0.906 vs 0.883, p = 0.057). After the application of CAD software, the unnecessary biopsy rate of BI-RADS categories 4 and 5 was significantly decreased (33.0% vs 11.9%, 37.8% vs 14.5%), and the malignant rate of biopsy in category 4a was significantly increased (11.6% vs 40.7%, 7.4% vs 34.9%, all p < 0.001).

conclusionsCAD software on ultrasound can be used as an effective auxiliary diagnostic tool for differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast masses and reducing unnecessary biopsy. CLINICAL

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03887598) KEY POINTS: • Prospective multicenter study showed that computer-aided diagnosis software provides greater diagnostic confidence for differentiating benign and malignant breast masses. • Computer-aided diagnosis software can help radiologists reduce unnecessary biopsy. • The management of patients with breast masses becomes more appropriate.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsComputersDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonography, MammaryArtificial intelligenceBiopsyBreast cancerComputer-assisted diagnosisUltrasound imaging

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.