Search

Objective: Breast arterial calcifications (BAC) are a sex-specific cardiovascular disease biomarker that might improve cardiovascular risk stratification in women. We implemented a deep convolutional neural network for automatic BAC detection and quantification., Methods: In this retrospective study, four readers labelled four-view mammograms as BAC positive (BAC+) or BAC negative (BAC-) at image level. Starting from a pretrained VGG16 model, we trained a convolutional neural network to discriminate BAC+ and BAC- mammograms. Accuracy, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) were used to assess the diagnostic performance. Predictions of calcified areas were generated using the generalized gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM++) method, and their correlation with manual measurement of BAC length in a subset of cases was assessed using Spearman ρ., Results: A total 1493 women (198 BAC+) with a median age of 59 years (interquartile range 52-68) were included and partitioned in a training set of 410 cases (1640 views, 398 BAC+), validation set of 222 cases (888 views, 89 BAC+), and test set of 229 cases (916 views, 94 BAC+). The accuracy, F1 score, and AUC-ROC were 0.94, 0.86, and 0.98 in the training set; 0.96, 0.74, and 0.96 in the validation set; and 0.97, 0.80, and 0.95 in the test set, respectively. In 112 analyzed views, the Grad-CAM++ predictions displayed a strong correlation with BAC measured length (ρ = 0.88, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Our model showed promising performances in BAC detection and in quantification of BAC burden, showing a strong correlation with manual measurements., Clinical Relevance Statement: Integrating our model to clinical practice could improve BAC reporting without increasing clinical workload, facilitating large-scale studies on the impact of BAC as a biomarker of cardiovascular risk, raising awareness on women's cardiovascular health, and leveraging mammographic screening., Key Points: • We implemented a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for BAC detection and quantification. • Our CNN had an area under the receiving operator curve of 0.95 for BAC detection in the test set composed of 916 views, 94 of which were BAC+ . • Furthermore, our CNN showed a strong correlation with manual BAC measurements (ρ = 0.88) in a set of 112 views., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To investigate the knowledge of radiologists on breast arterial calcifications (BAC) and attitude about BAC reporting, communication to women, and subsequent action., Methods: An online survey was offered to EUSOBI members, with 17 questions focused on demographics, level of experience, clinical setting, awareness of BAC association with cardiovascular risk, mammographic reporting, modality of BAC assessment, and action habits. Descriptive statistics were used., Results: Among 1084 EUSOBI members, 378 (34.9%) responded to the survey, 361/378 (95.5%) radiologists, 263 females (69.6%), 112 males (29.6%), and 3 (0.8%) who did not specify their gender. Of 378 respondents, 305 (80.7%) declared to be aware of BAC meaning in terms of cardiovascular risk and 234 (61.9%) to routinely include BAC in mammogram reports, when detected. Excluding one inconsistent answer, simple annotation of BAC presence was declared by 151/233 (64.8%), distinction between low versus extensive BAC burden by 59/233 (25.3%), and usage of an ordinal scale by 22/233 (9.5%) and of a cardinal scale by 1/233 (0.4%). Among these 233 radiologists reporting BAC, 106 (45.5%) declared to orally inform the woman and, in case of severe BAC burden, 103 (44.2%) to investigate cardiovascular history, and 92 (39.5%) to refer the woman to a cardiologist., Conclusion: Among EUSOBI respondents, over 80% declared to be aware of BAC cardiovascular meaning and over 60% to include BAC in the report. Qualitative BAC assessment predominates. About 40% of respondents who report on BAC, in the case of severe BAC burden, investigate cardiovascular history and/or refer the woman to a cardiologist., Key Points: • Of 1084 EUSOBI members, 378 (35%) participated: 81% of respondents are aware of breast arterial calcification (BAC) cardiovascular meaning and 62% include BAC in the mammogram report. • Of those reporting BAC, description of presence was declared by 65%, low versus extensive burden distinction by 25%, usage of an ordinal scale by 10%, and of a cardinal scale by 0.4%; 46% inform the woman and, in case of severe BAC burden, 44% examine cardiovascular history, and 40% refer her to a cardiologist. • European breast radiologists may be ready for large-scale studies to ascertain the role of BAC assessment in the comprehensive framework of female cardiovascular disease prevention.

Aims: Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) is used increasingly as an imaging biomarker of cardiovascular risk (CVR). Our aim was to compare semiautomatic CIMT (sCIMT) versus manual CIMT (mCIMT) for reproducibility and prediction of CVR., Materials and Methods: Two independent readers measured sCIMT and mCIMT on previously acquired images of the right common carotid artery of 200 consecutive patients. Measurements were performed twice, four weeks apart; sCIMT was reported along with an image quality index (IQI) provided by the software. CVR stratification was compared for thresholds established by mCIMT studies, adapted for sCIMT according to a regression model., Results: sCIMT (median 0.67 mm, interquartile range [IQR] 0.57‒0.76 mm) was significantly lower (p<0.001) than mCIMT (median 0.76 mm, IQR 0.63‒0.84 mm; ρ=0.832, p<0.001, slope 0.714, intercept 0.124). Overall, intra-reader reproducibility was 76% for sCIMT and 83% for mCIMT (p=0.002), inter-reader reproducibility 75% and 76%, respectively (p=0.316). In 129 cases with IQI≥0.65, reproducibility was significantly higher (p≤0.004) for sCIMT than for mCIMT (intra-reader 85% versus 83%, inter-reader 80% versus 77%,). The agreement between sCIMT and mCIMT for CVR stratification was fair both overall (κ=0.270) and for IQI≥0.65 (κ=0.345), crude concordance being 79% and 88%, respectively., Conclusions: Reproducibility of sCIMT was not higher than mCIMT overall but sCIMT was significantly more reproducible than mCIMT for high-IQI cases. sCIMT cannot be used for CVR stratification due to fair concordance with mCIMT, even for high IQI. More research is required to improve image quality and define sCIMT-based thresholds for stratification of CVR.