000 03195cam a2200349 a 4500
003 EG-GiCUC
005 20250223032847.0
008 211114s2020 ua dh f m 000 0 eng d
040 _aEG-GiCUC
_beng
_cEG-GiCUC
041 0 _aeng
049 _aDeposite
097 _aM.Sc
099 _aCai01.11.31.M.Sc.2020.He.E
100 0 _aHedaya Wasfy Ali Mohamed
245 1 0 _aEfficacy of mammographic artificial intelligence in detecting different histopathological subtypes of breast cancer /
_cHedaya Wasfy Ali Mohamed ; Supervised Mariam Raafat Louis Bouls , Basma Mohamed Alkalaawy , Passant Essam Eldin Ahmed Shibel
246 1 5 _aفاعلية الذكاء الاصطناعى بالتصوير الشعاعى للثدى فى الكشف عن الأنواع النسيجية المختلفة لسرطان الثدى
260 _aCairo :
_bHedaya Wasfy Ali Mohamed ,
_c2020
300 _a116 P. :
_bcharts , facsimiles ;
_c25cm
502 _aThesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Medicine - Department of Radio-Diagnosis
520 _aBackground:Mammography screening currently relies on subjective human interpretation. Artificial intelligence (AI) advances could be used to increase mammography screening accuracy by reducing missed cancers and false positives.AI-based algorithms can also increase the efficiency of interpretation workflows by reducing workload and interpretation time Methods: The study was prospectively carried on 123 female patients with 134 pathologically proven malignant breast lesion (between December 2020 to June 2021); the mean age was 53.6 ± SD 12.0 years old.Females coming to breast imaging unit either for screening or with breast complaint, basic sono-mammography was done. Artificial intelligence images were automatically generated by AI software (Lunit INSIGHT for mammography) from mammographic images. Biopsieswere done for suspicious breast lesions.Artificial intelligence results as well as mammography results were correlated to the pathology as the gold reference standard. Results: Artificial intelligence has higher sensitivity than mammography in detecting malignant breast lesions; sensitivity of the two methods (AI and mammography) was 96.6% vs 87.3% and false negative rate 3.4% vs 12.7% respectively. Also AI was more sensitive to detect cancers with suspicious mass 95.2% vs 75%, suspicious calcifications 100% vs 86.5% as well as asymmetry and distortion 100% vs 84.6%.AI has better performance in detecting different histopathological subtype of breast malignancy as DCIS, IDC and ILC than mammography with sensitivity (100%, 96.7%, 96.6%) vs (88.9%, 89%, 82.2%) respectively.While in other rare types of breast malignancy both AI and mammography showed the same sensitivity 80%
530 _aIssued also as CD
653 4 _aArtificial intelligence
653 4 _aBreast cancer
653 4 _aMammography
700 0 _aBasma Mohamed Alkalaawy ,
_eSupervisor
700 0 _aMariam Raafat Louis Bouls ,
_eSupervisor
700 0 _aPassant Essam Eldin Ahmed Shibel ,
_eSupervisor
856 _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf
905 _aNazla
_eRevisor
905 _aShimaa
_eCataloger
942 _2ddc
_cTH
999 _c83126
_d83126