An
artificial intelligence software, developed by researchers at Houston
Methodist, reliably interprets mammograms, helping doctors make a quick, yet
accurate prediction of breast cancer risk. According to a study published in
CANCER (AUG 29), the software works about 30 times faster than a human and has
about a 99% accuracy as it translates patient charts into diagnostic
information. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12.1
million mammograms performed annually in the United States. The American Cancer
Society (ACS) shows that fifty percent of those mammograms yield false-positive
results. The current broad range is 3 to 95 percent cancer risk. When women
fall in between these two numbers, they are recommended for a biopsy. The ACS
estimates that of the 1.6 million breast biopsies performed annually in the
nation, twenty percent are unnecessary due to false-positive results. Of the artificial intelligence software
Stephen T. Wong, Ph.D., P.E., and chair of the Department of Systems Medicine
and Bioengineering at Houston Methodist Research Institute said, “This software
intelligently reviews millions of records in a short amount of time, enabling
us to determine breast cancer risk more efficiently using a patient’s mammogram.
This has the potential to decrease unnecessary biopsies.” It can take up to 70
hours to manually review 50 charts. It takes the software a few hours to review
500.
I found it
interesting to know that there really is research still going on today and we
are making progress on that research. You often think that now-a-days there is nothing
else we can do. We learn so much in school and it seems that everything has already been done, we often times don’t realize that there is still so much out there
that we can accomplish and this is one of them.
I didn’t know that so many
mammograms showed false-positive results which then leads to unnecessary
biopsies. That right there shows how much we can improve things and this
development is another step closer to doing so. It'll improve the time used to review the charts and get results back to patients, the inaccurate results, and so much stress caused to families during times like these.
Jaydon R.
At the end of your post you said, we "often think that now-a-days there is nothing else we can do." I have thought and felt the same way. Has every thought has already been thought? It hurts my head to think about it. Instead though we need to be focusing on What contribution we can make. It's up to us to look beyond the mark and discover how to make this world better for us and for the future generations.
ReplyDeleteabove comment by Lindsay C.
DeleteYou mentioned that there are often mammograms that show false-positive results. Is it possible for results to show up negative when they are actually positive? If so, how likely is that to happen?
ReplyDelete-Ashley B.
I did a little research myself. This is what I found; "False negatives occur in 1 of every 2,500 women screened and occur more often in younger women than in older women because the breast tissue of younger women is denser" (NHS Breast Screening Programme – "Helping you decide" leaflet July 2013).
DeleteI think this goes to show that regular screening is a great idea for women. I have an aunt who was screened and they didn't find anything, but three years later she found a lump and it was cancer.
Joseph Sneddon
Having some knowledge of how false-positive/negative results are obtained, and to state very briefly, I can tell you that they are calculated through statistics. I won't go into the details of how they are calculated, but there is always a chance of getting either a false-positive or a false-negative. The person calculating the statistics is able to manipulate the calculation to increase the chances of getting a false-positive, which in turn decreases the chance of a false-negative, and visa versa. It is much better to have extra (unnecessary) testing done (due to a false-positive), than to have a cancer overlooked (false-negative). I hope this helps you to better understand why they will often show a false positive.
DeleteWS
Thank you for this post! I have multiple family members who have been affected by breast cancer, and a few friends. I constantly worry about problems like breast cancer in my future wife and children. It's great to see that progress is being made in the diagnostics of cancer. I personally wish to enter the medical research field for diagnostic care.
ReplyDeleteJoseph Sneddon
I often do not like the idea of moving to programs such as this one because I feel like it eliminates many jobs in communities. However, in this instance, I feel that this is the more efficient thing to do. I also did not know that there were so many false positive results for mammograms; frankly, I am pretty surprised by that fact. I definitely think that there needed to be some improvements made in this testing process, and I feel like the proper improvements are being made.
ReplyDelete-Mindy C.
I think this is some great technology being used, seeing how a false result could be traumatic both ways. Thinking you don't have breast cancer, when you actually do, or thinking you do have it, when you actually don't. That news can be so stressful for families and loved ones to hear. I am glad they are taking leaps and bounds in achieving a more accurate reading. C.W.
ReplyDeleteI used to work at the hospital as an MA and my job was to call the women with positive results on their mammogram. It was an awful responsibility and i dreaded it. I remember 2 occasions, however, where i called the women and after their biopsies we were able to move on normally because their mammograms had given false positives. I am so glad to see medical technology advancing so quickly and in such an important field. KH
ReplyDelete