Literature DB >> 31763356

Evaluation of data augmentation via synthetic images for improved breast mass detection on mammograms using deep learning.

Kenny H Cha1, Nicholas Petrick1, Aria Pezeshk1, Christian G Graff1, Diksha Sharma1, Andreu Badal1, Berkman Sahiner1.   

Abstract

We evaluated whether using synthetic mammograms for training data augmentation may reduce the effects of overfitting and increase the performance of a deep learning algorithm for breast mass detection. Synthetic mammograms were generated using in silico procedural analytic breast and breast mass modeling algorithms followed by simulated x-ray projections of the breast models into mammographic images. In silico breast phantoms containing masses were modeled across the four BI-RADS breast density categories, and the masses were modeled with different sizes, shapes, and margins. A Monte Carlo-based x-ray transport simulation code, MC-GPU, was used to project the three-dimensional phantoms into realistic synthetic mammograms. 2000 mammograms with 2522 masses were generated to augment a real data set during training. From the Curated Breast Imaging Subset of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (CBIS-DDSM) data set, we used 1111 mammograms (1198 masses) for training, 120 mammograms (120 masses) for validation, and 361 mammograms (378 masses) for testing. We used faster R-CNN for our deep learning network with pretraining from ImageNet using the Resnet-101 architecture. We compared the detection performance when the network was trained using different percentages of the real CBIS-DDSM training set (100%, 50%, and 25%), and when these subsets of the training set were augmented with 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 synthetic mammograms. Free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) analysis was performed to compare performance with and without the synthetic mammograms. We generally observed an improved test FROC curve when training with the synthetic images compared to training without them, and the amount of improvement depended on the number of real and synthetic images used in training. Our study shows that enlarging the training data with synthetic samples can increase the performance of deep learning systems.
© 2019 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE).

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast mass detection; computer-aided detection; deep learning; in silico imaging; mammography; synthetic mammogram images

Year:  2019        PMID: 31763356      PMCID: PMC6872953          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.7.1.012703

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)        ISSN: 2329-4302


  14 in total

1.  Classifier design for computer-aided diagnosis: effects of finite sample size on the mean performance of classical and neural network classifiers.

Authors:  H P Chan; B Sahiner; R F Wagner; N Petrick
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Feature selection and classifier performance in computer-aided diagnosis: the effect of finite sample size.

Authors:  B Sahiner; H P Chan; N Petrick; R F Wagner; L Hadjiiski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Ideal observer approximation using Bayesian classification neural networks.

Authors:  M A Kupinski; D C Edwards; M L Giger; C E Metz
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Recent advances in observer performance methodology: jackknife free-response ROC (JAFROC).

Authors:  Dev P Chakraborty
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

5.  Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages.

Authors:  Q McNEMAR
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  1947-06       Impact factor: 2.500

6.  Breast-Cancer Tumor Size, Overdiagnosis, and Mammography Screening Effectiveness.

Authors:  H Gilbert Welch; Philip C Prorok; A James O'Malley; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Transfer learning from RF to B-mode temporal enhanced ultrasound features for prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Shekoofeh Azizi; Parvin Mousavi; Pingkun Yan; Amir Tahmasebi; Jin Tae Kwak; Sheng Xu; Baris Turkbey; Peter Choyke; Peter Pinto; Bradford Wood; Purang Abolmaesumi
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 2.924

8.  Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Algorithm for Detection of Diabetic Retinopathy in Retinal Fundus Photographs.

Authors:  Varun Gulshan; Lily Peng; Marc Coram; Martin C Stumpe; Derek Wu; Arunachalam Narayanaswamy; Subhashini Venugopalan; Kasumi Widner; Tom Madams; Jorge Cuadros; Ramasamy Kim; Rajiv Raman; Philip C Nelson; Jessica L Mega; Dale R Webster
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-12-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  A deep learning method for classifying mammographic breast density categories.

Authors:  Aly A Mohamed; Wendie A Berg; Hong Peng; Yahong Luo; Rachel C Jankowitz; Shandong Wu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Evaluation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis as Replacement of Full-Field Digital Mammography Using an In Silico Imaging Trial.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Christian G Graff; Andreu Badal; Diksha Sharma; Rongping Zeng; Frank W Samuelson; Stephen J Glick; Kyle J Myers
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2018-11-02
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Image Augmentation Techniques for Mammogram Analysis.

Authors:  Parita Oza; Paawan Sharma; Samir Patel; Festus Adedoyin; Alessandro Bruno
Journal:  J Imaging       Date:  2022-05-20

2.  In silico imaging clinical trials: cheaper, faster, better, safer, and more scalable.

Authors:  Aldo Badano
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-01-19       Impact factor: 2.279

3.  A High-Performance Deep Neural Network Model for BI-RADS Classification of Screening Mammography.

Authors:  Kuen-Jang Tsai; Mei-Chun Chou; Hao-Ming Li; Shin-Tso Liu; Jung-Hsiu Hsu; Wei-Cheng Yeh; Chao-Ming Hung; Cheng-Yu Yeh; Shaw-Hwa Hwang
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 4.  Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Myopia: Current and Future Directions.

Authors:  Chenchen Zhang; Jing Zhao; Zhe Zhu; Yanxia Li; Ke Li; Yuanping Wang; Yajuan Zheng
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-03-11

5.  Identification of Cotton Leaf Lesions Using Deep Learning Techniques.

Authors:  Rafael Faria Caldeira; Wesley Esdras Santiago; Barbara Teruel
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.