H

Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania achieves 93.6% sensitivity using DBT AI case score change tracking for breast cancer screening

“Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania achieves 93.6% sensitivity using DBT AI case score change tracking for breast cancer screening” documents a Medical Imaging & Radiology deployment in Imaging & Radiology at Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. pubs.rsna.org reports sensitivity (combined score + change threshold): 93.6%; this directory has not independently verified that result.

Maintained by Peter Korpak, Founder & Chief AnalystHow evidence is checked

Evidence at a glance

Evidence status:
Automated evidence gate passed
Deployment timeframe:
Not reported by source
Reported outcome metrics:
3 cited below
Directory entry published:
Source link checked:

The source-link check confirms reachability, not independent re-verification of every claim.

93.6%Sensitivity (combined score + change threshold)
62.8%Specificity (combined score + change threshold)
+21.1 pointsMean case score change in true-positive exams

Source-reported figures — cited source: pubs.rsna.org

The Challenge

Traditional 2D computer-aided detection (CAD) showed limited or no improvement in breast cancer screening performance and increased radiologist interpretation time. No prior study had evaluated whether tracking changes in AI case scores over sequential screenings could improve cancer detection and recall decisions for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT).

The Solution

The institution deployed ProFound AI (version 2.0, iCAD) on four Hologic Selenia Dimensions DBT units, generating per-examination case scores (0–100) for 31,741 screenings. A retrospective analysis of 1,799 patients with two or more sequential screenings assessed whether the direction and magnitude of score change over time correlated with true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and false-negative outcomes.

Results

True-positive examinations had the highest average case score (75) and the largest mean score increase (+21.1) between sequential screenings, both statistically significant versus true-negative (P < .001) and false-positive (P = .02) groups. Combining a case score threshold of ≥26 with a score-change threshold of ≥+1 achieved 93.6% sensitivity and 62.8% specificity, outperforming either threshold alone. The authors conclude that tracking score trajectory alongside absolute score can meaningfully support radiologist recall decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Tracking AI score change over sequential screenings adds diagnostic value beyond a single absolute score, particularly for identifying true-positive cancers early.
  • A combined threshold (score ≥26 AND change ≥+1) meaningfully improves sensitivity (93.6%) while maintaining useful specificity (62.8%), reducing both missed cancers and unnecessary recalls.
  • Persistently high scores without large changes warrant careful lesion-level review, as benign findings (e.g., vascular calcifications) can confound the case-level score.

Share:

Details

Company Size
Enterprise
Evidence status
Automated evidence gate passed
Deployment timeframe
Not reported by source
Directory entry published
Source link checked

Cited source

pubs.rsna.org

Have a similar implementation?

Share your customer's AI results and link it to your vendor profile.

Submit a case study →