Correa-Medero, Ramon Luis

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI)–based, mammography breast cancer risk prediction models show improved discriminatory accuracy relative to clinical risk models. However, data on their calibration are limited. This study compared model performance of 3 clinical breast cancer risk models: Gail, Tyrer–Cuzick v8, and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium v3 with the MIRAI AI-risk model. Methods Digital mammograms were ascertained from a screening mammography cohort of 12 308 women within the Mayo Clinic Biobank with 250 incident breast cancers (176 invasive) within 5 years. We predicted 5-year breast cancer risk, estimated discriminatory accuracy (C-index), and calibration (observed-to-expected ratio) of both overall and invasive breast cancer and compared estimates using bootstrapping approaches. Results MIRAI demonstrated similar or improved discriminatory accuracy of overall breast cancer (C-index = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 0.74) and invasive breast cancer (C-index = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.75) compared with clinical models (overall breast cancer: C-index = 0.59-0.68; invasive breast cancer: C-index = 0.60-0.68). MIRAI’s calibration for risk of overall breast cancer (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.08) was improved compared with Gail (observed-to-expected ratio = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.38) and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (observed-to-expected ratio = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.56) but similar to TC with volumetric percent density and polygenic risk score (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.13). However, for low-risk women (approximately 50%), MIRAI overestimated risk of overall breast cancer. MIRAI also overestimated risk of invasive breast cancer across the risk spectrum (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.58 to 0.78), whereas clinical models had good calibration (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.86–0.99). Conclusion MIRAI demonstrated stronger discriminatory accuracy than clinical models for 5-year overall and invasive breast cancer risk prediction but overestimated risk for both breast cancer endpoints. AI-based risk models should consider discriminatory accuracy and calibration for invasive cancer before implementation.

Background: Differential kidney function assessment is an important part of preoperative evaluation of various urological interventions. It is obtained through dedicated nuclear medical imaging and is not yet implemented through conventional Imaging. Objective: We assess if differential kidney function can be obtained through evaluation of contrast-enhanced computed tomography(CT) using a combination of deep learning and (2D and 3D) radiomic features. Methods: All patients who underwent kidney nuclear scanning at Mayo Clinic sites between 2018–2022 were collected. CT scans of the kidneys were obtained within a 3-month interval before or after the nuclear scans were extracted. Patients who underwent a urological or radiological intervention within this time frame were excluded. A segmentation model was used to segment both kidneys. 2D and 3D radiomics features were extracted and compared between the two kidneys to compute delta radiomics and assess its ability to predict differential kidney function. Performance was reported using receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity, and specificity. Results: Studies from Arizona & Rochester formed our internal dataset ( n = 1,159). Studies from Florida were separately processed as an external test set to validate generalizability. We obtained 323 studies from our internal sites and 39 studies from external sites. The best results were obtained by a random forest model trained on 3D delta radiomics features. This model achieved an area under curve (AUC) of 0.85 and 0.81 on internal and external test sets, while specificity and sensitivity were 0.84,0.68 on the internal set, 0.70, and 0.65 on the external set. Conclusion: This proposed automated pipeline can derive important differential kidney function information from contrast-enhanced CT and reduce the need for dedicated nuclear scans for early-stage differential kidney functional assessment. Clinical Impact: We establish a machine learning methodology for assessing differential kidney function from routine CT without the need for expensive and radioactive nuclear medicine scans.