Production Deployment of Computer-Aided Detection Systems in Mammography Screening: Throughput, False Positive Reduction, and Clinical Workflow Integration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9262.IJAIDSML-V7I2P121Keywords:
Mammography, Computer-Aided Detection, CAD, AI-CAD, Deep Learning, Radiology Workflow, PACS Integration, Recall Rate, False Positive Reduction, Screening, Breast Cancer, Clinical DeploymentAbstract
Computer-aided detection systems for mammography have been part of clinical practice since the late 1990s, with the first generation FDA-cleared in 1998 and rapid adoption across United States screening facilities reaching a substantial majority by the mid 2010s. The first generation systems were associated with concerns about increased false positives and unclear effects on diagnostic accuracy in real-world deployment. The current generation, based on deep learning and rebranded by some vendors as AI-CAD to distinguish it from the classical CAD that preceded it, has produced results in observational studies that suggest meaningfully better diagnostic performance, although the long-term effect on patient outcomes remains the subject of ongoing prospective trials. This paper describes the production deployment of a mammographic prediction system that processed more than five thousand images per week, flagged suspicious anomalies for radiologist review, and contributed to a ten percent reduction in patient recall rates in the deployment setting. The paper focuses on the engineering decisions that determine whether such a system delivers its potential in production: throughput design, integration with the radiology workflow including PACS and reporting, false positive management, alert formatting to support rather than disrupt radiologist judgment, and the ongoing monitoring required to detect performance drift. The paper closes with a discussion of the regulatory environment, the limitations of single-site observational deployment as evidence, and the ongoing prospective trial work that is needed to confirm long-term outcomes.
References
[1] Lehman, C. D., Wellman, R. D., Buist, D. S. M., et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(11), 1828 to 1837, 2015. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=D, Wellman, R
[2] Fenton, J. J., Taplin, S. H., Carney, P. A., et al. Influence of Computer-Aided Detection on Performance of Screening Mammography. New England Journal of Medicine, 356(14), 1399 to 1409, 2007. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=J, Taplin, S
[3] Yoon, J. H., Han, K., Suh, H. J., et al. Artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted detection/diagnosis (AI-CAD) for screening mammography: Outcomes of AI-CAD in the mammographic interpretation workflow. European Journal of Radiology Open, Vol. 11, 100509, December 2023. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=H, Han, K., Suh, H
[4] Yoon, J. H., Strand, F., Baltzer, P. A. T., et al. Standalone AI for Breast Cancer Detection at Screening Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. Radiology, 307(5), 2023. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=H, Strand, F., Baltzer, P
[5] Rodriguez-Ruiz, A., Lang, K., Gubern-Merida, A., et al. Stand-Alone Artificial Intelligence for Breast Cancer Detection in Mammography. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 111(9), 916 to 922, 2019. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Stand-Alone Artificial Intelligence for Breast Cancer Detection in Mammography
[6] McKinney, S. M., Sieniek, M., Godbole, V., et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature, 577(7788), 89 to 94, 2020. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=M, Sieniek, M., Godbole, V., et al
[7] Lang, K., Josefsson, V., Larsson, A. M., et al. Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial (MASAI). Lancet Oncology, 24(8), 936 to 944, 2023. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=M, et al
[8] American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), Fifth Edition. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), Fifth Edition
[9] Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine Standards Committee. DICOM Standard, NEMA PS3. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=DICOM Standard, NEMA PS3
[10] Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise. IHE Radiology Technical Framework. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=IHE Radiology Technical Framework
[11] United States Food and Drug Administration. Marketing Submission Recommendations for a Predetermined Change Control Plan for Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning-Enabled Device Software Functions, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, 2024. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Marketing Submission Recommendations for a Predetermined Change Control Plan for Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning-Enabled Device Software Functions, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, 2024
[12] United States Food and Drug Administration. Computer-Assisted Detection Devices Applied to Radiology Images and Radiology Device Data: Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Computer-Assisted Detection Devices Applied to Radiology Images and Radiology Device Data: Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff
[13] European Union. Medical Device Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2017/745. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Medical Device Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2017/745
[14] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 13485 Medical devices: Quality management systems. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=ISO 13485 Medical devices: Quality management systems
[15] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14971 Medical devices: Application of risk management to medical devices. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=ISO 14971 Medical devices: Application of risk management to medical devices
[16] World Health Organization. WHO position paper on mammography screening, 2014. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=WHO position paper on mammography screening, 2014
[17] US Preventive Services Task Force. Final Recommendation Statement: Breast Cancer Screening, 2024. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Final Recommendation Statement: Breast Cancer Screening, 2024
[18] Litjens, G., Kooi, T., Bejnordi, B. E., et al. A Survey on Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis. Medical Image Analysis, 42, 60 to 88, 2017. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=E, et al
[19] LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., and Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436 to 444, 2015. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Deep learning










