Deep Learning in Radiology.

In this research, we exploited the deep learning framework to differentiate the distinctive types of lesions and nodules in breast acquired with ultrasound imaging. A biopsy-proven benchmarking dataset was built from 5151 patients cases containing a total of 7408 ultrasound breast images, representative of semi-automatically segmented lesions associated with masses. The dataset comprised 4254 benign and 3154 malignant lesions. The developed method includes histogram equalization, image cropping and margin augmentation. The GoogLeNet convolutionary neural network was trained to the database to differentiate benign and malignant tumors. The networks were trained on the data with augmentation and the data without augmentation. Both of them showed an area under the curve of over 0.9. The networks showed an accuracy of about 0.9 (90%), a sensitivity of 0.86 and a specificity of 0.96. Although target regions of interest (ROIs) were selected by radiologists, meaning that radiologists still have to point out the location of the ROI, the classification of malignant lesions showed promising results. If this method is used by radiologists in clinical situations it can classify malignant lesions in a short time and support the diagnosis of radiologists in discriminating malignant lesions. Therefore, the proposed method can work in tandem with human radiologists to improve performance, which is a fundamental purpose of computer-aided diagnosis.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/aa82ec/pdf

A deep learning framework for supporting the classification of breast lesions in ultrasound images.

https://pure.aber.ac.uk/portal/files/25842704/1_s2.0_S1361841518300902_main.pdf

Deep learning in mammography and breast histology, an overview and future trends.

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this article are to describe concepts that radiologists should understand to evaluate machine learning projects, including common algorithms, supervised as opposed to unsupervised techniques, statistical pitfalls, and data considerations for training and evaluation, and to briefly describe ethical dilemmas and legal risk. CONCLUSION. Machine learning includes a broad class of computer programs that improve with experience. The complexity of creating, training, and monitoring machine learning indicates that the success of the algorithms will require radiologist involvement for years to come, leading to engagement rather than replacement.

Implementing Machine Learning in Radiology Practice and Research.

Purpose
Mammographic breast density is an established risk marker for breast cancer and is visually assessed by radiologists in routine mammogram image reading, using four qualitative Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories. It is particularly difficult for radiologists to consistently distinguish the two most common and most variably assigned BI-RADS categories, i.e., “scattered density” and “heterogeneously dense”. The aim of this work was to investigate a deep learning-based breast density classifier to consistently distinguish these two categories, aiming at providing a potential computerized tool to assist radiologists in assigning a BI-RADS category in current clinical workflow.

Methods
In this study, we constructed a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based model coupled with a large (i.e., 22,000 images) digital mammogram imaging dataset to evaluate the classification performance between the two aforementioned breast density categories. All images were collected from a cohort of 1,427 women who underwent standard digital mammography screening from 2005 to 2016 at our institution. The truths of the density categories were based on standard clinical assessment made by board-certified breast imaging radiologists. Effects of direct training from scratch solely using digital mammogram images and transfer learning of a pretrained model on a large nonmedical imaging dataset were evaluated for the specific task of breast density classification. In order to measure the classification performance, the CNN classifier was also tested on a refined version of the mammogram image dataset by removing some potentially inaccurately labeled images. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to measure the accuracy of the classifier.

Results
The AUC was 0.9421 when the CNN-model was trained from scratch on our own mammogram images, and the accuracy increased gradually along with an increased size of training samples. Using the pretrained model followed by a fine-tuning process with as few as 500 mammogram images led to an AUC of 0.9265. After removing the potentially inaccurately labeled images, AUC was increased to 0.9882 and 0.9857 for without and with the pretrained model, respectively, both significantly higher (P < 0.001) than when using the full imaging dataset.

Conclusions
Our study demonstrated high classification accuracies between two difficult to distinguish breast density categories that are routinely assessed by radiologists. We anticipate that our approach will help enhance current clinical assessment of breast density and better support consistent density notification to patients in breast cancer screening.

A deep learning method for classifying mammographic breast density categories.

Microcalcification is an effective indicator of early breast cancer. To improve the diagnostic accuracy of microcalcifications, this study evaluates the performance of deep learning-based models on large datasets for its discrimination. A semi-automated segmentation method was used to characterize all microcalcifications. A discrimination classifier model was constructed to assess the accuracies of microcalcifications and breast masses, either in isolation or combination, for classifying breast lesions. Performances were compared to benchmark models. Our deep learning model achieved a discriminative accuracy of 87.3% if microcalcifications were characterized alone, compared to 85.8% with a support vector machine. The accuracies were 61.3% for both methods with masses alone and improved to 89.7% and 85.8% after the combined analysis with microcalcifications. Image segmentation with our deep learning model yielded 15, 26 and 41 features for the three scenarios, respectively. Overall, deep learning based on large datasets was superior to standard methods for the discrimination of microcalcifications. Accuracy was increased by adopting a combinatorial approach to detect microcalcifications and masses simultaneously. This may have clinical value for early detection and treatment of breast cancer.

/pdf/discrimination-of-breast-cancer-with-microcalcifications-on-52qkp6avjp.pdf

Cangzheng Jin

Papers

Discrimination of Breast Cancer with Microcalcifications on Mammography by Deep Learning