Recent technological advances in the field of artificial intelligence hold promise in addressing medical challenges in breast cancer care, such as early diagnosis, cancer subtype determination and molecular profiling, prediction of lymph node metastases, and prognostication of treatment response and probability of recurrence. Radiomics is a quantitative approach to medical imaging, which aims to enhance the existing data available to clinicians by means of advanced mathematical analysis using artificial intelligence. Various published studies from different fields in imaging have highlighted the potential of radiomics to enhance clinical decision making. In this review, we describe the evolution of AI in breast imaging and its frontiers, focusing on handcrafted and deep learning radiomics. We present a typical workflow of a radiomics analysis and a practical “how-to” guide. Finally, we summarize the methodology and implementation of radiomics in breast cancer, based on the most recent scientific literature to help researchers and clinicians gain fundamental knowledge of this emerging technology. Alongside this, we discuss the current limitations of radiomics and challenges of integration into clinical practice with conceptual consistency, data curation, technical reproducibility, adequate accuracy, and clinical translation. The incorporation of radiomics with clinical, histopathological, and genomic information will enable physicians to move forward to a higher level of personalized management of patients with breast cancer.

Purpose: To assess the noise characteristics of the new adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR‐V) in comparison to ASiR.Methods: A water phantom was acquired with common clinical scanning parameters, at five different levels of CTDI_vol. Images were reconstructed with different kernels (STD, SOFT, and BONE), different IR levels (40%, 60%, and 100%) and different slice thickness (ST) (0.625 and 2.5 mm), both for ASiR‐V and ASiR. Noise properties were investigated and noise power spectrum (NPS) was evaluated.Results: ASiR‐V significantly reduced noise relative to FBP: noise reduction was in the range 23%–60% for a 0.625 mm ST and 12%–64% for the 2.5 mm ST. Above 2 mGy, noise reduction for ASiR‐V had no dependence on dose. Noise reduction for ASIR‐V has dependence on ST, being greater for STD and SOFT kernels at 2.5 mm. For the STD kernel ASiR‐V has greater noise reduction for both ST, if compared to ASiR. For the SOFT kernel, results varies according to dose and ST, while for BONE kernel ASIR‐V shows less noise reduction. NPS for CT Revolution has dose dependent behavior at lower doses. NPS for ASIR‐V and ASiR is similar, showing a shift toward lower frequencies as the IR level increases for STD and SOFT kernels. The NPS is different between ASiR‐V and ASIR with BONE kernel. NPS for ASiR‐V appears to be ST dependent, having a shift toward lower frequencies for 2.5 mm ST.Conclusions: ASiR‐V showed greater noise reduction than ASiR for STD and SOFT kernels, while keeping the same NPS. For the BONE kernel, ASiR‐V presents a completely different behavior, with less noise reduction and modified NPS. Noise properties of the ASiR‐V are dependent on reconstruction slice thickness. The noise properties of ASiR‐V suggest the need for further measurements and efforts to establish new CT protocols to optimize clinical imaging.

Standardized radiological reports stimulate debate in the medical imaging field. This review paper explores the advantages and challenges of standardized reporting. Standardized reporting can offer improved clarity and efficiency of communication among radiologists and the multidisciplinary team. However, challenges include limited flexibility, initially increased time and effort, and potential user experience issues. The efforts toward standardization are examined, encompassing the establishment of reporting templates, use of common imaging lexicons, and integration of clinical decision support tools. Recent technological advancements, including multimedia-enhanced reporting and AI-driven solutions, are discussed for their potential to improve the standardization process. Organizations such as the ACR, ESUR, RSNA, and ESR have developed standardized reporting systems, templates, and platforms to promote uniformity and collaboration. However, challenges remain in terms of workflow adjustments, language and format variability, and the need for validation. The review concludes by presenting a set of ten essential rules for creating standardized radiology reports, emphasizing clarity, consistency, and adherence to structured formats.

Radiomics investigates the predictive role of quantitative parameters calculated from radiological images. In oncology, tumour segmentation constitutes a crucial step of the radiomic workflow. Manual segmentation is time-consuming and prone to inter-observer variability. In this study, a state-of-the-art deep-learning network for automatic segmentation (nnU-Net) was applied to computed tomography images of lung tumour patients, and its impact on the performance of survival radiomic models was assessed. In total, 899 patients were included, from two proprietary and one public datasets. Different network architectures (2D, 3D) were trained and tested on different combinations of the datasets. Automatic segmentations were compared to reference manual segmentations performed by physicians using the DICE similarity coefficient. Subsequently, the accuracy of radiomic models for survival classification based on either manual or automatic segmentations were compared, considering both hand-crafted and deep-learning features. The best agreement between automatic and manual contours (DICE = 0.78 ± 0.12) was achieved averaging 2D and 3D predictions and applying customised post-processing. The accuracy of the survival classifier (ranging between 0.65 and 0.78) was not statistically different when using manual versus automatic contours, both with hand-crafted and deep features. These results support the promising role nnU-Net can play in automatic segmentation, accelerating the radiomic workflow without impairing the models’ accuracy. Further investigations on different clinical endpoints and populations are encouraged to confirm and generalise these findings.

This study aims to evaluate the Average Glandular Dose (AGD) and diagnostic performance of CEM versus Digital Mammography (DM) as well as versus DM plus one-view Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), which were performed in the same patients at short intervals of time. A preventive screening examination in high-risk asymptomatic patients between 2020 and 2022 was performed with two-view Digital Mammography (DM) projections (Cranio Caudal and Medio Lateral) plus one Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) projection (mediolateral oblique, MLO) in a single session examination. For all patients in whom we found a suspicious lesion by using DM + DBT, we performed (within two weeks) a CEM examination. AGD and compression force were compared between the diagnostic methods. All lesions identified by DM + DBT were biopsied; then, we assessed whether lesions found by DBT were also highlighted by DM alone and/or by CEM. We enrolled 49 patients with 49 lesions in the study. The median AGD was lower for DM alone than for CEM (3.41 mGy vs. 4.24 mGy, p = 0.015). The AGD for CEM was significantly lower than for the DM plus one single projection DBT protocol (4.24 mGy vs. 5.55 mGy, p < 0.001). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the median compression force between the CEM and DM + DBT. DM + DBT allows the identification of one more invasive neoplasm one in situ lesion and two high-risk lesions, compared to DM alone. The CEM, compared to DM + DBT, failed to identify only one of the high-risk lesions. According to these results, CEM could be used in the screening of asymptomatic high-risk patients.

The study aimed to evaluate the performance of radiomics features and one ultrasound CAD (computer-aided diagnosis) in the prediction of the malignancy of a breast lesion detected with ultrasound and to develop a nomogram incorporating radiomic score and available information on CAD performance, conventional Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System evaluation (BI-RADS), and clinical information. Data on 365 breast lesions referred for breast US with subsequent histologic analysis between January 2020 and March 2022 were retrospectively collected. Patients were randomly divided into a training group (n = 255) and a validation test group (n = 110). A radiomics score was generated from the US image. The CAD was performed in a subgroup of 209 cases. The radiomics score included seven radiomics features selected with the LASSO logistic regression model. The multivariable logistic model incorporating CAD performance, BI-RADS evaluation, clinical information, and radiomic score as covariates showed promising results in the prediction of the malignancy of breast lesions: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, [AUC]: 0.914; 95% Confidence Interval, [CI]: 0.876–0.951. A nomogram was developed based on these results for possible future applications in clinical practice.