Back to Authors

Drukker, Karen

0000-0001-6544-3476

Mayo Clinic

United States Food and Drug Administration

Citations 3

AI and machine learning in medical imaging: key points from development to translation
Samala, Ravi K. , Chan, Heang‐Ping , Petrick, Nicholas , Mahmood, Usman , Summers, Ronald M. , Yoshida, Hiroyuki , Huo, Zhimin, Vergara, Daniel , Mazurchuk, Richard, Grizzard, Kevin , Suzuki, Kenji , Armato, Samuel G. , Shukla-Dave, Amita , Chan, Heang-Ping , Mahmood, Usman , Summers, Ronald M , Deserno, Thomas M , Yoshida, Hiroyuki , Drukker, Karen , Huisman, Henkjan , Samala, Ravi K , Drukker, Karen , Shukla‐Dave, Amita , Sahiner, Berkman , Greenspan, Hayit , Tourassi, Georgia D. , Regge, Daniele , Näppi, Janne J. , Chen, Quan , Morra, Lia , Hadjiiski, Lubomir M.

BJR|Artificial Intelligence | April 29, 2024 | Volume: 1 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/bjrai/ubae006 Get It

Abstract Innovation in medical imaging artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) demands extensive data collection, algorithmic advancements, and rigorous performance assessments encompassing aspects such as generalizability, uncertainty, bias, fairness, trustworthiness, and interpretability. Achieving widespread integration of AI/ML algorithms into diverse clinical tasks will demand a steadfast commitment to overcoming issues in model design, development, and performance assessment. The complexities of AI/ML clinical translation present substantial challenges, requiring engagement with relevant stakeholders, assessment of cost-effectiveness for user and patient benefit, timely dissemination of information relevant to robust functioning throughout the AI/ML lifecycle, consideration of regulatory compliance, and feedback loops for real-world performance evidence. This commentary addresses several hurdles for the development and adoption of AI/ML technologies in medical imaging. Comprehensive attention to these underlying and often subtle factors is critical not only for tackling the challenges but also for exploring novel opportunities for the advancement of AI in radiology.
Artificial intelligence in medicine: mitigating risks and maximizing benefits via quality assurance, quality control, and acceptance testing
Mahmood, Usman , Chan, Heang‐Ping , Drukker, Karen , Samala, Ravi K. , Vergara, Daniel , Petrick, Nicholas , Huo, Zhimin, Summers, Ronald M. , Cha, Kenny H, Grizzard, Kevin , Yoshida, Hiroyuki , Mazurchuk, Richard, Suzuki, Kenji , Armato, Samuel G. , Chan, Heang-Ping , Drukker, Karen , Samala, Ravi K , Vergara, Daniel , Petrick, Nicholas , Summers, Ronald M , Deserno, Thomas M , Shukla‐Dave, Amita , Chen, Quan , Greenspan, Hayit , Sahiner, Berkman , Cha, Kenny H, Tourassi, Georgia D. , Näppi, Janne J. , Regge, Daniele , Morra, Lia , Huisman, Henkjan , Hadjiiski, Lubomir M.

BJR|Artificial Intelligence | March 4, 2024 | Volume: 1 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/bjrai/ubae003 Get It

Abstract The adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in medicine poses challenges to existing clinical workflows. This commentary discusses the necessity of context-specific quality assurance (QA), emphasizing the need for robust QA measures with quality control (QC) procedures that encompass (1) acceptance testing (AT) before clinical use, (2) continuous QC monitoring, and (3) adequate user training. The discussion also covers essential components of AT and QA, illustrated with real-world examples. We also highlight what we see as the shared responsibility of manufacturers or vendors, regulators, healthcare systems, medical physicists, and clinicians to enact appropriate testing and oversight to ensure a safe and equitable transformation of medicine through AI.
Using computer‐extracted image phenotypes from tumors on breast magnetic resonance imaging to predict breast cancer pathologic stage
Drukker, Karen , Li, Hui , Bonaccio, Ermelinda, Zuley, Margarita L. , Ganott, Marie A., Net, Jose , Sutton, Elizabeth J. , Brandt, Kathleen R. , Conzen, Suzanne D. , Li, Lan , Zhu, Yitan , Jaffe, C. Carl, Huang, Erich P. , Freymann, John , Kirby, Justin , Morris, Elizabeth A. , Burnside, Elizabeth S. , Whitman, Gary J. , Ji, Yuan , Giger, Maryellen , Drukker, Karen

Cancer | November 30, 2015 | Volume: 122 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 748-757

10.1002/cncr.29791 Get It

BACKGROUNDThe objective of this study was to demonstrate that computer‐extracted image phenotypes (CEIPs) of biopsy‐proven breast cancer on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can accurately predict pathologic stage.METHODSThe authors used a data set of deidentified breast MRIs organized by the National Cancer Institute in The Cancer Imaging Archive. In total, 91 biopsy‐proven breast cancers were analyzed from patients who had information available on pathologic stage (stage I, n = 22; stage II, n = 58; stage III, n = 11) and surgically verified lymph node status (negative lymph nodes, n = 46; ≥ 1 positive lymph node, n = 44; no lymph nodes examined, n = 1). Tumors were characterized according to 1) radiologist‐measured size and 2) CEIP. Then, models were built that combined 2 CEIPs to predict tumor pathologic stage and lymph node involvement, and the models were evaluated in a leave‐1‐out, cross‐validation analysis with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as the value of interest.RESULTSTumor size was the most powerful predictor of pathologic stage, but CEIPs that captured biologic behavior also emerged as predictive (eg, stage I and II vs stage III demonstrated an AUC of 0.83). No size measure was successful in the prediction of positive lymph nodes, but adding a CEIP that described tumor “homogeneity” significantly improved discrimination (AUC = 0.62; P = .003) compared with chance.CONCLUSIONSThe current results indicate that MRI phenotypes have promise for predicting breast cancer pathologic stage and lymph node status. Cancer 2016;122:748–757. © 2015 American Cancer Society.