MinJae Woo

Carolina A. M. Heming, Mohamed Abdalla, Shahram Mohanna et al.

Clinical AI model reporting cards should be expanded to incorporate a broad bias reporting of both social and non-social factors. Non-social factors consider the role of other factors, such as disease dependent, anatomic, or instrument factors on AI model bias, which are essential to ensure safe deployment.

InChan Hwang, MinJae Woo

This research presents a novel framework for the compression and decompression of medical images utilizing the Latent Diffusion Model (LDM). The LDM represents advancement over the denoising diffusion probabilistic model (DDPM) with a potential to yield superior image quality while requiring fewer computational resources in the image decompression process. A possible application of LDM and Torchvision for image upscaling has been explored using medical image data, serving as an alternative to traditional image compression and decompression algorithms. The experimental outcomes demonstrate that this approach surpasses a conventional file compression algorithm, and convolutional neural network (CNN) models trained with decompressed files perform comparably to those trained with original image files. This approach also significantly reduces dataset size so that it can be distributed with a smaller size, and medical images take up much less space in medical devices. The research implications extend to noise reduction in lossy compression algorithms and substitute for complex wavelet-based lossless algorithms.

Beatrice Brown-Mulry, Rohan Satya Isaac, Sang Hyup Lee et al.

While research has established the potential of AI models for mammography to improve breast cancer screening outcomes, there have not been any detailed subgroup evaluations performed to assess the strengths and weaknesses of commercial models for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging. This study presents a granular evaluation of the Lunit INSIGHT DBT model on a large retrospective cohort of 163,449 screening mammography exams from the Emory Breast Imaging Dataset (EMBED). Model performance was evaluated in a binary context with various negative exam types (162,081 exams) compared against screen detected cancers (1,368 exams) as the positive class. The analysis was stratified across demographic, imaging, and pathologic subgroups to identify potential disparities. The model achieved an overall AUC of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90-0.92) with a precision of 0.08 (95% CI: 0.08-0.08), and a recall of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71-0.76). Performance was found to be robust across demographics, but cases with non-invasive cancers (AUC: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.83-0.87), calcifications (AUC: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.78-0.82), and dense breast tissue (AUC: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.91) were associated with significantly lower performance compared to other groups. These results highlight the need for detailed evaluation of model characteristics and vigilance in considering adoption of new tools for clinical deployment.

Linglin Zhang, Beatrice Brown-Mulry, Vineela Nalla et al.

Although deep learning models for abnormality classification can perform well in screening mammography, the demographic, imaging, and clinical characteristics associated with increased risk of model failure remain unclear. This retrospective study uses the Emory BrEast Imaging Dataset(EMBED) containing mammograms from 115931 patients imaged at Emory Healthcare between 2013-2020, with BI-RADS assessment, region of interest coordinates for abnormalities, imaging features, pathologic outcomes, and patient demographics. Multiple deep learning models were trained to distinguish between abnormal tissue patches and randomly selected normal tissue patches from screening mammograms. We assessed model performance by subgroups defined by age, race, pathologic outcome, tissue density, and imaging characteristics and investigated their associations with false negatives (FN) and false positives (FP). We also performed multivariate logistic regression to control for confounding between subgroups. The top-performing model, ResNet152V2, achieved accuracy of 92.6%(95%CI=92.0-93.2%), and AUC 0.975(95%CI=0.972-0.978). Before controlling for confounding, nearly all subgroups showed statistically significant differences in model performance. However, after controlling for confounding, we found lower FN risk associates with Other race(RR=0.828;p=.050), biopsy-proven benign lesions(RR=0.927;p=.011), and mass(RR=0.921;p=.010) or asymmetry(RR=0.854;p=.040); higher FN risk associates with architectural distortion (RR=1.037;p<.001). Higher FP risk associates to BI-RADS density C(RR=1.891;p<.001) and D(RR=2.486;p<.001). Our results demonstrate subgroup analysis is important in mammogram classifier performance evaluation, and controlling for confounding between subgroups elucidates the true associations between variables and model failure. These results can help guide developing future breast cancer detection models.

Jiwoong J. Jeong, Brianna L. Vey, Ananth Reddy et al.

Developing and validating artificial intelligence models in medical imaging requires datasets that are large, granular, and diverse. To date, the majority of publicly available breast imaging datasets lack in one or more of these areas. Models trained on these data may therefore underperform on patient populations or pathologies that have not previously been encountered. The EMory BrEast imaging Dataset (EMBED) addresses these gaps by providing 3650,000 2D and DBT screening and diagnostic mammograms for 116,000 women divided equally between White and African American patients. The dataset also contains 40,000 annotated lesions linked to structured imaging descriptors and 61 ground truth pathologic outcomes grouped into six severity classes. Our goal is to share this dataset with research partners to aid in development and validation of breast AI models that will serve all patients fairly and help decrease bias in medical AI.