Literature DB >> 30860901

Accuracy of Distinguishing Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia From Ductal Carcinoma In Situ With Convolutional Neural Network-Based Machine Learning Approach Using Mammographic Image Data.

Richard Ha1, Simukayi Mutasa2, Eduardo Pascual Van Sant2, Jenika Karcich2, Christine Chin3, Michael Z Liu4, Sachin Jambawalikar4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that convolutional neural networks can be used to predict which patients with pure atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) may be safely monitored rather than undergo surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 298 unique images from 149 patients were used for our convolutional neural network algorithm. A total of 134 images from 67 patients with ADH that had been diagnosed by stereotactic-guided biopsy of calcifications but had not been upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive cancer at the time of surgical excision. A total of 164 images from 82 patients with mammographic calcifications indicated that ductal carcinoma in situ was the final diagnosis. Two standard mammographic magnification views of the calcifications (a craniocaudal view and a mediolateral or lateromedial view) were used for analysis. Calcifications were segmented using an open-source software platform and images were resized to fit a bounding box of 128 × 128 pixels. A topology with 15 hidden layers was used to implement the convolutional neural network. The network architecture contained five residual layers and dropout of 0.25 after each convolution. Patients were randomly separated into a training-and-validation set (80% of patients) and a test set (20% of patients). Code was implemented using open-source software on a workstation with an open-source operating system and a graphics card.
RESULTS: The AUC value was 0.86 (95% CI, ± 0.03) for the test set. Aggregate sensitivity and specificity were 84.6% (95% CI, ± 4.0%) and 88.2% (95% CI, ± 3.0%), respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was 86.7% (95% CI, ± 2.9).
CONCLUSION: It is feasible to apply convolutional neural networks to distinguish pure atypical ductal hyperplasia from ductal carcinoma in situ with the use of mammographic images. A larger dataset will likely result in further improvement of our prediction model.

Entities:  

Keywords:  atypical ductal hyperplasia; breast cancer; convolutional neural network; ductal carcinoma in situ; prediction

Year:  2019        PMID: 30860901      PMCID: PMC8111785          DOI: 10.2214/AJR.18.20250

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  20 in total

1.  Atypical ductal hyperplasia in directional vacuum-assisted biopsy of breast microcalcifications: considerations for surgical excision.

Authors:  Christopher V Nguyen; Constance T Albarracin; Gary J Whitman; Adriana Lopez; Nour Sneige
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Scoring system for predicting malignancy in patients diagnosed with atypical ductal hyperplasia at ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy.

Authors:  Eunyoung Ko; Wonshik Han; Jong Won Lee; Jihyoung Cho; Eun-Kyu Kim; So-Youn Jung; Mee Joo Kang; Woo Kyung Moon; In Ae Park; Sung-Won Kim; Ku Sang Kim; Eun Sook Lee; Kyu Hong Min; Seok Won Kim; Dong-Young Noh
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Fully Automated Convolutional Neural Network Method for Quantification of Breast MRI Fibroglandular Tissue and Background Parenchymal Enhancement.

Authors:  Richard Ha; Peter Chang; Eralda Mema; Simukayi Mutasa; Jenika Karcich; Ralph T Wynn; Michael Z Liu; Sachin Jambawalikar
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Context-aware stacked convolutional neural networks for classification of breast carcinomas in whole-slide histopathology images.

Authors:  Babak Ehteshami Bejnordi; Guido Zuidhof; Maschenka Balkenhol; Meyke Hermsen; Peter Bult; Bram van Ginneken; Nico Karssemeijer; Geert Litjens; Jeroen van der Laak
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-12-14

Review 5.  Lobular Neoplasia and Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia on Core Biopsy: Current Surgical Management Recommendations.

Authors:  Jennifer M Racz; Jodi M Carter; Amy C Degnim
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Value of breast MRI for patients with a biopsy showing atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH).

Authors:  Keiko Tsuchiya; Naoko Mori; David V Schacht; Deepa Sheth; Gregory S Karczmar; Gillian M Newstead; Hiroyuki Abe
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 7.  Diagnostic value of vacuum-assisted breast biopsy for breast carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Ying-Hua Yu; Chi Liang; Xi-Zi Yuan
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Long-Term Safety of Observation in Selected Women Following Core Biopsy Diagnosis of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia.

Authors:  Rhiana S Menen; Nivetha Ganesan; Therese Bevers; Jun Ying; Robin Coyne; Deanna Lane; Constance Albarracin; Isabelle Bedrosian
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Convolutional Neural Network Based Breast Cancer Risk Stratification Using a Mammographic Dataset.

Authors:  Richard Ha; Peter Chang; Jenika Karcich; Simukayi Mutasa; Eduardo Pascual Van Sant; Michael Z Liu; Sachin Jambawalikar
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Detecting and classifying lesions in mammograms with Deep Learning.

Authors:  Dezső Ribli; Anna Horváth; Zsuzsa Unger; Péter Pollner; István Csabai
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Understanding artificial intelligence based radiology studies: What is overfitting?

Authors:  Simukayi Mutasa; Shawn Sun; Richard Ha
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 1.605

2.  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

3.  Dynamic Changes of Convolutional Neural Network-based Mammographic Breast Cancer Risk Score Among Women Undergoing Chemoprevention Treatment.

Authors:  Haley Manley; Simukayi Mutasa; Peter Chang; Elise Desperito; Katherine Crew; Richard Ha
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Diagnostic value of radiomics and machine learning with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia in predicting malignant upgrade.

Authors:  Roberto Lo Gullo; Kerri Vincenti; Carolina Rossi Saccarelli; Peter Gibbs; Michael J Fox; Isaac Daimiel; Danny F Martinez; Maxine S Jochelson; Elizabeth A Morris; Jeffrey S Reiner; Katja Pinker
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Assessment of Machine Learning of Breast Pathology Structures for Automated Differentiation of Breast Cancer and High-Risk Proliferative Lesions.

Authors:  Ezgi Mercan; Sachin Mehta; Jamen Bartlett; Linda G Shapiro; Donald L Weaver; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-08-02

6.  Application of deep learning to identify ductal carcinoma in situ and microinvasion of the breast using ultrasound imaging.

Authors:  Meng Zhu; Yong Pi; Zekun Jiang; Yanyan Wu; Hong Bu; Ji Bao; Yujuan Chen; Lijun Zhao; Yulan Peng
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.