Identifying factors that indicate the possibility of non-visible cases on mammograms using mammary gland content ratio estimated by artificial intelligence
Mammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the...
Saved in:
Published in | Frontiers in oncology Vol. 14; p. 1255109 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Switzerland
Frontiers Media S.A
05.03.2024
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 2234-943X 2234-943X |
DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2024.1255109 |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Mammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles based on the mammary gland content ratio estimated using artificial intelligence (AI) by patient age and compressed breast thickness (CBT).
We used AI previously developed by us to estimate the mammary gland content ratio and quantitatively analyze 26,232 controls and 150 non-visibles. First, we evaluated divergence trends between controls and non-visibles based on the average estimated mammary gland content ratio to ensure the importance of analysis by age and CBT. Next, we evaluated the possibility that mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups affect the divergence between controls and non-visibles to specifically identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles. The images were classified into two groups for the estimated mammary gland content ratios with a threshold of 50%, and logistic regression analysis was performed between controls and non-visibles.
The average estimated mammary gland content ratio was significantly higher in non-visibles than in controls when the overall sample, the patient age was ≥40 years and the CBT was ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The differences in the average estimated mammary gland content ratios in the controls and non-visibles for the overall sample was 7.54%, the differences in patients aged 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years were 6.20%, 7.48%, and 4.78%, respectively, and the differences in those with a CBT of 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 mm were 6.67%, 9.71%, and 16.13%, respectively. In evaluating mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups, we also found positive correlations for non-visibles when controls were used as the baseline for the overall sample, in patients aged 40-59 years, and in those with a CBT ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The corresponding odds ratios were ≥2.20, with a maximum value of 4.36.
The study findings highlight an estimated mammary gland content ratio of ≥50% in patients aged 40-59 years or in those with ≥40 mm CBT could be indicative factors for non-visibles. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Mammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles based on the mammary gland content ratio estimated using artificial intelligence (AI) by patient age and compressed breast thickness (CBT).BackgroundMammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles based on the mammary gland content ratio estimated using artificial intelligence (AI) by patient age and compressed breast thickness (CBT).We used AI previously developed by us to estimate the mammary gland content ratio and quantitatively analyze 26,232 controls and 150 non-visibles. First, we evaluated divergence trends between controls and non-visibles based on the average estimated mammary gland content ratio to ensure the importance of analysis by age and CBT. Next, we evaluated the possibility that mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups affect the divergence between controls and non-visibles to specifically identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles. The images were classified into two groups for the estimated mammary gland content ratios with a threshold of 50%, and logistic regression analysis was performed between controls and non-visibles.MethodsWe used AI previously developed by us to estimate the mammary gland content ratio and quantitatively analyze 26,232 controls and 150 non-visibles. First, we evaluated divergence trends between controls and non-visibles based on the average estimated mammary gland content ratio to ensure the importance of analysis by age and CBT. Next, we evaluated the possibility that mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups affect the divergence between controls and non-visibles to specifically identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles. The images were classified into two groups for the estimated mammary gland content ratios with a threshold of 50%, and logistic regression analysis was performed between controls and non-visibles.The average estimated mammary gland content ratio was significantly higher in non-visibles than in controls when the overall sample, the patient age was ≥40 years and the CBT was ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The differences in the average estimated mammary gland content ratios in the controls and non-visibles for the overall sample was 7.54%, the differences in patients aged 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years were 6.20%, 7.48%, and 4.78%, respectively, and the differences in those with a CBT of 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 mm were 6.67%, 9.71%, and 16.13%, respectively. In evaluating mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups, we also found positive correlations for non-visibles when controls were used as the baseline for the overall sample, in patients aged 40-59 years, and in those with a CBT ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The corresponding odds ratios were ≥2.20, with a maximum value of 4.36.ResultsThe average estimated mammary gland content ratio was significantly higher in non-visibles than in controls when the overall sample, the patient age was ≥40 years and the CBT was ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The differences in the average estimated mammary gland content ratios in the controls and non-visibles for the overall sample was 7.54%, the differences in patients aged 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years were 6.20%, 7.48%, and 4.78%, respectively, and the differences in those with a CBT of 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 mm were 6.67%, 9.71%, and 16.13%, respectively. In evaluating mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups, we also found positive correlations for non-visibles when controls were used as the baseline for the overall sample, in patients aged 40-59 years, and in those with a CBT ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The corresponding odds ratios were ≥2.20, with a maximum value of 4.36.The study findings highlight an estimated mammary gland content ratio of ≥50% in patients aged 40-59 years or in those with ≥40 mm CBT could be indicative factors for non-visibles.ConclusionThe study findings highlight an estimated mammary gland content ratio of ≥50% in patients aged 40-59 years or in those with ≥40 mm CBT could be indicative factors for non-visibles. BackgroundMammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles based on the mammary gland content ratio estimated using artificial intelligence (AI) by patient age and compressed breast thickness (CBT).MethodsWe used AI previously developed by us to estimate the mammary gland content ratio and quantitatively analyze 26,232 controls and 150 non-visibles. First, we evaluated divergence trends between controls and non-visibles based on the average estimated mammary gland content ratio to ensure the importance of analysis by age and CBT. Next, we evaluated the possibility that mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups affect the divergence between controls and non-visibles to specifically identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles. The images were classified into two groups for the estimated mammary gland content ratios with a threshold of 50%, and logistic regression analysis was performed between controls and non-visibles.ResultsThe average estimated mammary gland content ratio was significantly higher in non-visibles than in controls when the overall sample, the patient age was ≥40 years and the CBT was ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The differences in the average estimated mammary gland content ratios in the controls and non-visibles for the overall sample was 7.54%, the differences in patients aged 40–49, 50–59, and ≥60 years were 6.20%, 7.48%, and 4.78%, respectively, and the differences in those with a CBT of 40–49, 50–59, and ≥60 mm were 6.67%, 9.71%, and 16.13%, respectively. In evaluating mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups, we also found positive correlations for non-visibles when controls were used as the baseline for the overall sample, in patients aged 40–59 years, and in those with a CBT ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The corresponding odds ratios were ≥2.20, with a maximum value of 4.36.ConclusionThe study findings highlight an estimated mammary gland content ratio of ≥50% in patients aged 40–59 years or in those with ≥40 mm CBT could be indicative factors for non-visibles. Mammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with no or benign findings on mammography (hereby referred to as non-visibles). Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles based on the mammary gland content ratio estimated using artificial intelligence (AI) by patient age and compressed breast thickness (CBT). We used AI previously developed by us to estimate the mammary gland content ratio and quantitatively analyze 26,232 controls and 150 non-visibles. First, we evaluated divergence trends between controls and non-visibles based on the average estimated mammary gland content ratio to ensure the importance of analysis by age and CBT. Next, we evaluated the possibility that mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups affect the divergence between controls and non-visibles to specifically identify factors that indicate the possibility of non-visibles. The images were classified into two groups for the estimated mammary gland content ratios with a threshold of 50%, and logistic regression analysis was performed between controls and non-visibles. The average estimated mammary gland content ratio was significantly higher in non-visibles than in controls when the overall sample, the patient age was ≥40 years and the CBT was ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The differences in the average estimated mammary gland content ratios in the controls and non-visibles for the overall sample was 7.54%, the differences in patients aged 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years were 6.20%, 7.48%, and 4.78%, respectively, and the differences in those with a CBT of 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 mm were 6.67%, 9.71%, and 16.13%, respectively. In evaluating mammary gland content ratio ≥50% groups, we also found positive correlations for non-visibles when controls were used as the baseline for the overall sample, in patients aged 40-59 years, and in those with a CBT ≥40 mm (p < 0.05). The corresponding odds ratios were ≥2.20, with a maximum value of 4.36. The study findings highlight an estimated mammary gland content ratio of ≥50% in patients aged 40-59 years or in those with ≥40 mm CBT could be indicative factors for non-visibles. |
Author | Kai, Chiharu Nara, Miyako Futamura, Hitoshi Kondo, Satoshi Otsuka, Tsunehiro Kasai, Satoshi Kodama, Naoki |
AuthorAffiliation | 3 Otsuka Breastcare Clinic , Tokyo , Japan 2 Major in Health and Welfare, Graduate School of Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata , Niigata , Japan 1 Department of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata , Niigata , Japan 4 Department of Breast Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Disease Center, Komagome Hospital , Tokyo , Japan 5 Graduate School of Engineering, Muroran Institute of Technology, Muroran , Hokkaido , Japan 6 Healthcare Business Headquarters, Konica Minolta, Inc. , Tokyo , Japan |
AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: 6 Healthcare Business Headquarters, Konica Minolta, Inc. , Tokyo , Japan – name: 2 Major in Health and Welfare, Graduate School of Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata , Niigata , Japan – name: 3 Otsuka Breastcare Clinic , Tokyo , Japan – name: 1 Department of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata , Niigata , Japan – name: 5 Graduate School of Engineering, Muroran Institute of Technology, Muroran , Hokkaido , Japan – name: 4 Department of Breast Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Disease Center, Komagome Hospital , Tokyo , Japan |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Chiharu surname: Kai fullname: Kai, Chiharu – sequence: 2 givenname: Tsunehiro surname: Otsuka fullname: Otsuka, Tsunehiro – sequence: 3 givenname: Miyako surname: Nara fullname: Nara, Miyako – sequence: 4 givenname: Satoshi surname: Kondo fullname: Kondo, Satoshi – sequence: 5 givenname: Hitoshi surname: Futamura fullname: Futamura, Hitoshi – sequence: 6 givenname: Naoki surname: Kodama fullname: Kodama, Naoki – sequence: 7 givenname: Satoshi surname: Kasai fullname: Kasai, Satoshi |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38505584$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpVUstu3CAURVWqJp3mA7qpWHbjKS_bsKqqqI-RInXTSt2ha8AOkQ1TYCLNt_RnizvTKGEDXI7OOdx7XqOLEIND6C0lW86l-jDGYLaMMLGlrG0pUS_QFWNcNErwXxdPzpfoOud7UlfXEkr4K3TJZUvaVoor9GdnXSh-PPow4RFMiSnjcgcF-2C9geLqzeF9zNkPfvbliOOIq5XmwdfK7LCB7DKOAS-wLHFKsGR8yCvdWoB0xNMMwWITQ6lSOEHxEbtc_FLZLR6OGFJ14I2HuaoWN89-csG4N-jlCHN21-d9g35--fzj5ltz-_3r7ubTbWMElaWhpu-JUoQT1fXgLKMjAG970vFRciUEE2B6OaiBd8Z2YIRh0AlgowMrpeAbtDvx2gj3ep_86lpH8PpfIaZJrw7N7LRylZG21g6DEiMMCgYu6tlRaalVbeX6eOLaH4bFWVN_nGB-Rvr8Jfg7PcUHXQcolKieN-j9mSHF34faJ734bGpTILh4yJqpnvWk7aWs0HdPxR5V_o-3AugJYFIdYHLjI4QSvaZIrynSa4r0OUX8L2fov_A |
Cites_doi | 10.1007/s10549-021-06340-2 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.21505 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.22810 10.1002/cncr.33661 10.1186/s13058-022-01545-9 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30398-3 10.1186/s13058-021-01426-7 10.7326/M14-0692 10.2214/AJR.19.21994 10.1002/cam4.4158 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00774-6 10.1093/aje/kws446 10.1001/jama.2023.4004 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.2420 10.1002/cncr.31840 10.1007/s12282-023-01444-7 10.1038/s41598-021-96390-9 10.1007/s12282-018-0930-0 10.3390/cancers15102794 10.1186/s13058-022-01594-0 10.1093/annonc/mdz051 10.1186/s12905-022-01772-4 10.3804/jjabcs.30.15 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.02.013 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.39161 10.1186/bcr1829 10.3322/caac.21754 10.1007/s11604-022-01320-y 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.048 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00128-X 10.1186/s12905-022-01663-8 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Copyright © 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai. Copyright © 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai. – notice: Copyright © 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 7X8 5PM DOA |
DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2024.1255109 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic PubMed |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 2234-943X |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_9e83915ddbb94fab9ab34bb9e18d1d95 PMC10949406 38505584 10_3389_fonc_2024_1255109 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | 53G 5VS 9T4 AAFWJ AAKDD AAYXX ACGFO ACGFS ACXDI ADBBV ADRAZ AFPKN ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AOIJS BAWUL BCNDV CITATION DIK EBS EJD EMOBN GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HYE KQ8 M48 M~E OK1 PGMZT RNS RPM IPNFZ NPM RIG 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-1c77099030967aed21faa357063f8394424ac78b9b36cd6ac4c2a64a2fead8843 |
IEDL.DBID | M48 |
ISSN | 2234-943X |
IngestDate | Wed Aug 27 01:29:45 EDT 2025 Thu Aug 21 18:34:48 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 04:49:33 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 05:39:34 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 01:55:33 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Keywords | breast cancer non-visible mammary gland content ratio mammogram artificial intelligence |
Language | English |
License | Copyright © 2024 Kai, Otsuka, Nara, Kondo, Futamura, Kodama and Kasai. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c418t-1c77099030967aed21faa357063f8394424ac78b9b36cd6ac4c2a64a2fead8843 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 Reviewed by: Umar Mushtaq, Central University of Kashmir, India Rubina Manuela Trimboli, IRCCS San Donato Polyclinic, Italy Veronica Magni, University of Milan, Italy Edited by: Paolo Giorgi Rossi, IRCCS Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia, Italy |
OpenAccessLink | http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.3389/fonc.2024.1255109 |
PMID | 38505584 |
PQID | 2972705788 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_9e83915ddbb94fab9ab34bb9e18d1d95 pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10949406 proquest_miscellaneous_2972705788 pubmed_primary_38505584 crossref_primary_10_3389_fonc_2024_1255109 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2024-03-05 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2024-03-05 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 03 year: 2024 text: 2024-03-05 day: 05 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Switzerland |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Switzerland |
PublicationTitle | Frontiers in oncology |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Front Oncol |
PublicationYear | 2024 |
Publisher | Frontiers Media S.A |
Publisher_xml | – name: Frontiers Media S.A |
References | Lokate (B14) 2013; 178 Advani (B20) 2021; 4 McCarthy (B24) 2021; 10 Ochi (B28) 2022; 22 Sprague (B33) 2015; 162 Harris (B31) 2023; 329 McCarthy (B23) 2021; 127 Oiwa (B15) 2019; 26 Reimers (B26) 2021; 23 Moss (B5) 2015; 16 Scheel (B32) 2015; 212 Destounis (B8) 2020; 214 Friebel-Klingner (B22) 2021; 189 Kim (B25) 2022; 24 Ward (B27) 2022; 24 Oiwa (B16) 2023; 30 Malvezzi (B1) 2019; 30 Tsunoda (B10) 2021; 30 Harada-Shoji (B13) 2021; 4 Duffy (B7) 2020; 21 Giaquinto (B2) 2022; 72 (B11) 2013 Kai (B17) 2023; 15 Moini (B29) 2022; 22 Nara (B19) 2023; 41 B3 Tabár (B6) 2019; 125 Hakama (B4) 2008; 44 Ohuchi (B12) 2016; 387 Tran (B21) 2021; 4 Vachon (B9) 2007; 9 Tran (B18) 2023; 6 Lee (B30) 2021; 11 |
References_xml | – volume: 189 year: 2021 ident: B22 article-title: Risk factors for breast cancer subtypes among Black women undergoing screening mammography publication-title: Breast Cancer Res Treat doi: 10.1007/s10549-021-06340-2 – volume: 4 year: 2021 ident: B13 article-title: Evaluation of adjunctive ultrasonography for breast cancer detection among women aged 40–49 years with varying breast density undergoing screening mammography: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial publication-title: JAMA Netw Open doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.21505 – volume: 4 year: 2021 ident: B20 article-title: Association of breast density with breast cancer risk among women aged 65 years or older by age group and body mass index publication-title: JAMA Netw Open doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.22810 – volume: 127 year: 2021 ident: B23 article-title: Risk factors for an advanced breast cancer diagnosis within 2 years of a negative mammogram publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/cncr.33661 – volume: 24 start-page: 49 year: 2022 ident: B27 article-title: The association of age at menarche and adult height with mammographic density in the International Consortium of Mammographic Density publication-title: Breast Cancer Res doi: 10.1186/s13058-022-01545-9 – ident: B3 – volume: 21 year: 2020 ident: B7 article-title: Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality (UK Age trial): final results of a randomised, controlled trial publication-title: Lancet Oncol doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30398-3 – volume: 23 start-page: 49 year: 2021 ident: B26 article-title: Benign breast disease and changes in mammographic breast density publication-title: Breast Cancer Res doi: 10.1186/s13058-021-01426-7 – volume: 162 year: 2015 ident: B33 article-title: Benefits, harms, and cost-eff ectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts publication-title: Ann Intern Med doi: 10.7326/M14-0692 – volume: 214 start-page: 296 year: 2020 ident: B8 article-title: Update on breast density, risk estimation, and supplemental screening publication-title: AJR Am J Roentgenol doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21994 – volume: 10 year: 2021 ident: B24 article-title: Relationship of established risk factors with breast cancer subtypes publication-title: Cancer Med doi: 10.1002/cam4.4158 – volume: 387 year: 2016 ident: B12 article-title: J-START investigator groups. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anticancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomized controlled trial publication-title: Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00774-6 – volume: 178 year: 2013 ident: B14 article-title: Age-related changes in mammographic density and breast cancer risk publication-title: Am J Epidemiol doi: 10.1093/aje/kws446 – volume: 329 year: 2023 ident: B31 article-title: FDA Updates breast density reporting standards, other mammogram rules publication-title: JAMA doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.4004 – volume-title: ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast Imaging Reporting And Data System year: 2013 ident: B11 – volume: 6 start-page: e232420 year: 2023 ident: B18 article-title: Association of breast cancer family history with breast density over time in Korean women publication-title: JAMA Netw Open doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.2420 – volume: 125 year: 2019 ident: B6 article-title: The incidence of fatal breast cancer measures the increased effectiveness of therapy in women participating in mammography screening publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/cncr.31840 – volume: 30 year: 2023 ident: B16 article-title: Validity of computed mean compressed fibroglandular tissue thickness and breast composition for stratification of masking risk in Japanese women publication-title: Breast Cancer doi: 10.1007/s12282-023-01444-7 – volume: 11 start-page: 16785 year: 2021 ident: B30 article-title: Association between skeletal muscle mass and mammographic breast density publication-title: Sci Rep doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96390-9 – volume: 26 year: 2019 ident: B15 article-title: Can quantitative evaluation of mammographic breast density, “volumetric measurement”, predict the masking risk with dense breast tissue? Investigation by comparison with subjective visual estimation by Japanese radiologists publication-title: Breast Cancer doi: 10.1007/s12282-018-0930-0 – volume: 15 year: 2023 ident: B17 article-title: Automated estimation of mammary gland content ratio using regression deep convolutional neural network and the effectiveness in clinical practice as explainable artificial intelligence publication-title: Cancers doi: 10.3390/cancers15102794 – volume: 24 start-page: 96 year: 2022 ident: B25 article-title: Microcalcifications, mammographic breast density, and risk of breast cancer: a cohort study publication-title: Breast Cancer Res doi: 10.1186/s13058-022-01594-0 – volume: 30 year: 2019 ident: B1 article-title: European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2019 with focus on breast cancer publication-title: Ann Oncol doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz051 – volume: 22 start-page: 194 year: 2022 ident: B28 article-title: Impact of childbirth history on dense breast in mammographic screening: a cross-sectional study publication-title: BMC Womens Health doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-01772-4 – volume: 30 year: 2021 ident: B10 article-title: Current status on evaluation of breast composition publication-title: JJpn Assoc.Breast Cancer Screen doi: 10.3804/jjabcs.30.15 – volume: 44 year: 2008 ident: B4 article-title: Cancer screening: evidence and practice in Europe 2008 publication-title: Eur J Cancer doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.02.013 – volume: 4 year: 2021 ident: B21 article-title: Association of the interaction between mammographic breast density, body mass index, and menopausal status with breast cancer risk among Korean women publication-title: JAMA Netw Open doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.39161 – volume: 9 start-page: 217 year: 2007 ident: B9 article-title: Mammographic density, breast cancer risk and risk prediction publication-title: Breast Cancer Res doi: 10.1186/bcr1829 – volume: 72 year: 2022 ident: B2 article-title: Breast cancer statistics, 2022 publication-title: CA Cancer J Clin doi: 10.3322/caac.21754 – volume: 41 start-page: 54 year: 2023 ident: B19 article-title: Prediction of breast cancer risk by automated volumetric breast density measurement publication-title: Jpn J Radiol doi: 10.1007/s11604-022-01320-y – volume: 212 start-page: 9 year: 2015 ident: B32 article-title: Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts publication-title: Am J Obstet Gynecol doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.048 – volume: 16 year: 2015 ident: B5 article-title: Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality in the UK Age trial at 17 years’ follow-up: a randomised controlled trial publication-title: Lancet Oncol doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00128-X – volume: 22 start-page: 81 year: 2022 ident: B29 article-title: Evaluation of the association of endometriosis and mammographic breast density, a cross-sectional study publication-title: BMC Womens Health doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-01663-8 |
SSID | ssj0000650103 |
Score | 2.3372777 |
Snippet | Mammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography alone with... BackgroundMammography is the modality of choice for breast cancer screening. However, some cases of breast cancer have been diagnosed through ultrasonography... |
SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database |
StartPage | 1255109 |
SubjectTerms | artificial intelligence breast cancer mammary gland content ratio mammogram non-visible Oncology |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1La9wwEBYlh9BLadOX06ZMoKeCm1iWbenYhoRQSE5d2JvQs7vQ2iHrHPa35M92RnKCtxR66cmvxdZqZj3f7Hz6hrGPlp_KIOtYYjhpSuFaUZrTEErZeCF44D5G-mvg6rq9XIhvy2Y5a_VFnLAsD5wn7kThnVTVeG-tEtFYZWwtcD9U0ldeJfVSjHmzZCq_gxtqYJDLmJiFqZM49KRYyMVnDOlNIiDOAlHS6_8byPyTKzkLPhfP2bMJNcKXPNoX7EnoD9j-1VQXf8nu83rbtGYJphY6MK7MCFSSJtITHgW4GTYTG3YLQwTM_EtaW25_BnAYzTYw9PDLoGcSZWsDxIn_kU6Y2y2kZh9A1HZ8FCTHAZLoQMgbPNgt0FxmPQpYz4Q-X7HFxfn3s8tyartQOlHJsaxc11G5rMbspjPB8yoaUzcdgpkoaR0tF8Z10ipbt863xgnHTSsMj-iVUor6NdvDLxDeMjBKdp3F-Y6VFUo6FU1UonK4ISm5umCfHmygb7K6hsashAymyWCaDKYngxXsK1np8YMkjJ1OoLvoyV30v9ylYMcPNtb4Q6LqiOnDcLfRXCGUQ_QqZcHeZJs_PqqWCBQRqhVM7njDzlh2r_TrVRLrxoELhajp8H-M_h17SjOSOHDNe7Y33t6FIwRFo_2Q_P83tbQQ1g priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals |
Title | Identifying factors that indicate the possibility of non-visible cases on mammograms using mammary gland content ratio estimated by artificial intelligence |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38505584 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2972705788 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC10949406 https://doaj.org/article/9e83915ddbb94fab9ab34bb9e18d1d95 |
Volume | 14 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1La9wwEBZpCqWX0vTpPsIUeioojSXZlg4htKFpKGxPXdibkWQpCaR2unag-1v6Zzsje0O27KEXv1nZnk87nzyjbxh778ShDlpGju6k4MqXitvDELguGqVEEE2M9Glg9r08m6tvi2Kxw9blraYX2G8d2lE9qfny6uD3r9UxdvgjGnGiv_0Yu5bECIU6QG-NGDP32H10TBX109nE9sc_5oKqGlC5OSEVN0ouxjjn9l_Z8FRJ0H8bC_03mfKOdzp9zB5NtBI-jTjYYzuhfcIezKbA-VP2Z5yQmyY1wVRjB4YLOwDFrCkrCvcCXHf9lC67gi5C27WcJp-7qwAe3V0PXQs_LUKXcrp6oKT583TALleQqoEA5b5jU5CQBaThgZw4NOBWQCgdBSvg8o4S6DM2P_3y4-SMT3UZuFe5Hnjuq4riaRKHP5UNjcijtbKokO1ETRNthbK-0s44WfqmtF55YUtlRUTYaq3kc7aLDxBeMrBGV5XD9x1zp4z2JtpoVO5xRVpzMmMf1jaor0f5jRqHLWSwmgxWk8HqyWAZ-0xWur2QlLPTgW55Xk8dsTaITJMXTeOcUdE6Y51UuB1y3eSNKTL2bm3jGnsahU9sG7qbvhYGuR7SW60z9mK0-W1TUiOTRC6XMb2Bho172TzTXl4kNW-8cWWQVr36j4Zfs4f0wCkHrnjDdoflTXiLpGhw--ljAi6_LvL9BPu_TDMQmw |
linkProvider | Scholars Portal |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Identifying+factors+that+indicate+the+possibility+of+non-visible+cases+on+mammograms+using+mammary+gland+content+ratio+estimated+by+artificial+intelligence&rft.jtitle=Frontiers+in+oncology&rft.au=Kai%2C+Chiharu&rft.au=Otsuka%2C+Tsunehiro&rft.au=Nara%2C+Miyako&rft.au=Kondo%2C+Satoshi&rft.date=2024-03-05&rft.issn=2234-943X&rft.eissn=2234-943X&rft.volume=14&rft.spage=1255109&rft_id=info:doi/10.3389%2Ffonc.2024.1255109&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2234-943X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2234-943X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2234-943X&client=summon |