Literature DB >> 30422086

Radiomic versus Convolutional Neural Networks Analysis for Classification of Contrast-enhancing Lesions at Multiparametric Breast MRI.

Daniel Truhn1, Simone Schrading1, Christoph Haarburger1, Hannah Schneider1, Dorit Merhof1, Christiane Kuhl1.   

Abstract

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of radiomic analysis (RA) and a convolutional neural network (CNN) to radiologists for classification of contrast agent-enhancing lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric breast MRI. Materials and Methods Between August 2011 and August 2015, 447 patients with 1294 enhancing lesions (787 malignant, 507 benign; median size, 15 mm ± 20) were evaluated. Lesions were manually segmented by one breast radiologist. RA was performed by using L1 regularization and principal component analysis. CNN used a deep residual neural network with 34 layers. All algorithms were also retrained on half the number of lesions (n = 647). Machine interpretations were compared with prospective interpretations by three breast radiologists. Standard of reference was histologic analysis or follow-up. Areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs) were used to compare diagnostic performance. Results CNN trained on the full cohort was superior to training on the half-size cohort (AUC, 0.88 vs 0.83, respectively; P = .01), but there was no difference for RA and L1 regularization (AUC, 0.81 vs 0.80, respectively; P = .76) or RA and principal component analysis (AUC, 0.78 vs 0.78, respectively; P = .93). By using the full cohort, CNN performance (AUC, 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.86, 0.89) was better than RA and L1 regularization (AUC, 0.81; 95% confidence interval: 0.79, 0.83; P < .001) and RA and principal component analysis (AUC, 0.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.76, 0.80; P < .001). However, CNN was inferior to breast radiologist interpretation (AUC, 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.96, 0.99; P < .001). Conclusion A convolutional neural network was superior to radiomic analysis for classification of enhancing lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric breast MRI. Both approaches were inferior to radiologists' performance; however, more training data will further improve performance of convolutional neural network, but not that of radiomics algorithms. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30422086     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018181352

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  51 in total

1.  Artificial intelligence, machine (deep) learning and radio(geno)mics: definitions and nuclear medicine imaging applications.

Authors:  Dimitris Visvikis; Catherine Cheze Le Rest; Vincent Jaouen; Mathieu Hatt
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-07-06       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Quality of science and reporting of radiomics in oncologic studies: room for improvement according to radiomics quality score and TRIPOD statement.

Authors:  Ji Eun Park; Donghyun Kim; Ho Sung Kim; Seo Young Park; Jung Youn Kim; Se Jin Cho; Jae Ho Shin; Jeong Hoon Kim
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Deep learning in breast radiology: current progress and future directions.

Authors:  William C Ou; Dogan Polat; Basak E Dogan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Radiomic analysis of HTR-DCE MR sequences improves diagnostic performance compared to BI-RADS analysis of breast MR lesions.

Authors:  Saskia Vande Perre; Loïc Duron; Audrey Milon; Asma Bekhouche; Daniel Balvay; Francois H Cornelis; Laure Fournier; Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  CAD and AI for breast cancer-recent development and challenges.

Authors:  Heang-Ping Chan; Ravi K Samala; Lubomir M Hadjiiski
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Prospective Analysis Using a Novel CNN Algorithm to Distinguish Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia From Ductal Carcinoma in Situ in Breast.

Authors:  Simukayi Mutasa; Peter Chang; John Nemer; Eduardo Pascual Van Sant; Mary Sun; Alison McIlvride; Maham Siddique; Richard Ha
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-06-07       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 7.  Machine learning in breast MRI.

Authors:  Beatriu Reig; Laura Heacock; Krzysztof J Geras; Linda Moy
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Comparison of Breast MRI Tumor Classification Using Human-Engineered Radiomics, Transfer Learning From Deep Convolutional Neural Networks, and Fusion Methods.

Authors:  Heather M Whitney; Hui Li; Yu Ji; Peifang Liu; Maryellen L Giger
Journal:  Proc IEEE Inst Electr Electron Eng       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 10.961

9.  Radiomics methodology for breast cancer diagnosis using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Qiyuan Hu; Heather M Whitney; Maryellen L Giger
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-08-24

10.  Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions on DCE-MRI by Using Radiomics and Deep Learning With Consideration of Peritumor Tissue.

Authors:  Jiejie Zhou; Yang Zhang; Kai-Ting Chang; Kyoung Eun Lee; Ouchen Wang; Jiance Li; Yezhi Lin; Zhifang Pan; Peter Chang; Daniel Chow; Meihao Wang; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.