Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Comparing radiologists’ and artificial intelligence performance detecting suspicious microcalcifications on screening mammograms: a pilot cross-sectional study

  • Sarah J. Lewis
  • , Jayden B. Wells
  • , Zhengqiang Jiang
  • , Dania Abu Awwad
  • , Melissa L. Barron
  • , Phuong Dung (Yun) Trieu
    • The University of Sydney

    Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

    Abstract

    Introduction: Early breast cancer detection through periodic screening is crucial for reducing mortality due to later stage detection. Microcalcifications are common mammographic findings, present in both malignant lesions, benign pathologies, and normal tissues. This study aimed to assess radiologists’ observer performance in determining suspicious calcifications requiring recall, and to compare reader performance to an in-house AI model trained and tested on Australian screening mammograms. Methods: In this pilot proof-of-concept cross-sectional study, radiologists (n=27), breast physicians (n=2), and final year radiology trainees (n=6), completed the same mammographic test set consisting of 30 mammographic cases displaying different types of calcifications (10 breast cancer, 20 normal/benign). An in-house trained artificial intelligence model (Sydney-GMIC) was also applied to the same test set. Performance between readers was compared to AI via Spearman Rank-Order Correlation test. Work experience and caseload trends were compared using independent T tests and Mann-Whitney-U. Results: Sensitivity was significantly higher in radiologists with ≤ 10 years of experience compared to radiology trainees (72.2% vs 53.3%, p=0.042). Furthermore, readers with higher cases read per week (CPW) (i.e. 101-200 CPW compared to 0-20 CPW) had a decreased specificity (58.8% vs 74.6%, p=0.041), but higher sensitivity (68.8% vs 59.2%, p=0.12). In this pilot dataset, the Sydney-GMIC AI model demonstrated higher sensitivity and specificity than the radiologist means. The cases perceived as difficult by AI differed substantially from those challenging for human readers. Conclusions: This study highlights the challenging nature of recalling calcifications from screening mammograms only, with variable performance among readers. The findings of this small pilot study are exploratory in nature, but the AI performance signals the potential utility of AI models in mammographic analysis of screening cases to progress to recall.

    Original languageEnglish
    Number of pages11
    JournalCancer Control
    Volume33
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2026

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
      SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

    Keywords

    • artificial intelligence
    • breast cancer
    • mammography
    • microcalcification
    • observer performance

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing radiologists’ and artificial intelligence performance detecting suspicious microcalcifications on screening mammograms: a pilot cross-sectional study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this