Literature DB >> 32607908

Deep Learning Pre-training Strategy for Mammogram Image Classification: an Evaluation Study.

Kadie Clancy1, Sarah Aboutalib2, Aly Mohamed3, Jules Sumkin3, Shandong Wu4,5,6,7.   

Abstract

In this work, we assess how pre-training strategy affects deep learning performance for the task of distinguishing false-recall from malignancy and normal (benign) findings in digital mammography images. A cohort of 1303 breast cancer screening patients (4935 digital mammogram images in total) was retrospectively analyzed as the target dataset for this study. We assessed six different convolutional neural network model structures utilizing four different imaging datasets (total > 1.4 million images (including ImageNet); medical images different in terms of scale, modality, organ, and source) for pre-training on six classification tasks to assess how the performance of CNN models varies based on training strategy. Representative pre-training strategies included transfer learning with medical and non-medical datasets, layer freezing, varied network structure, and multi-view input for both binary and triple-class classification of mammogram images. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used as the model performance metric. The best performing model out of all experimental settings was an AlexNet model incrementally pre-trained on ImageNet and a large Breast Density dataset. The AUC for the six classification tasks using this model ranged from 0.68 to 0.77. In the case of distinguishing recalled-benign mammograms from others, four out of five pre-training strategies tested produced significant performance differences from the baseline model. This study suggests that pre-training strategy influences significant performance differences, especially in the case of distinguishing recalled- benign from malignant and benign screening patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Deep learning; Digital mammography; Training strategy; Transfer learning

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32607908      PMCID: PMC7573033          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-020-00369-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  15 in total

1.  Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study.

Authors:  Rebecca A Hubbard; Karla Kerlikowske; Chris I Flowers; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Weiwei Zhu; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Rafferty; Jeong Mi Park; Liane E Philpotts; Steven P Poplack; Jules H Sumkin; Elkan F Halpern; Loren T Niklason
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Convolutional Neural Networks for Medical Image Analysis: Full Training or Fine Tuning?

Authors:  Nima Tajbakhsh; Jae Y Shin; Suryakanth R Gurudu; R Todd Hurst; Christopher B Kendall; Michael B Gotway
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 4.  Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Talya Salz; Sarah E Lillie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Estimation of breast percent density in raw and processed full field digital mammography images via adaptive fuzzy c-means clustering and support vector machine segmentation.

Authors:  Brad M Keller; Diane L Nathan; Yan Wang; Yuanjie Zheng; James C Gee; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  A Deep Learning Mammography-based Model for Improved Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.

Authors:  Adam Yala; Constance Lehman; Tal Schuster; Tally Portnoi; Regina Barzilay
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 7.  Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Heidi D Nelson; Kari Tyne; Arpana Naik; Christina Bougatsos; Benjamin K Chan; Linda Humphrey
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  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

9.  Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning.

Authors:  Hoo-Chang Shin; Holger R Roth; Mingchen Gao; Le Lu; Ziyue Xu; Isabella Nogues; Jianhua Yao; Daniel Mollura; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  Deep Learning to Distinguish Recalled but Benign Mammography Images in Breast Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Sarah S Aboutalib; Aly A Mohamed; Wendie A Berg; Margarita L Zuley; Jules H Sumkin; Shandong Wu
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 12.531

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  The overview of the deep learning integrated into the medical imaging of liver: a review.

Authors:  Kailai Xiang; Baihui Jiang; Dong Shang
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2021-07-15       Impact factor: 6.047

Review 2.  Transfer learning for medical image classification: a literature review.

Authors:  Mate E Maros; Thomas Ganslandt; Hee E Kim; Alejandro Cosa-Linan; Nandhini Santhanam; Mahboubeh Jannesari
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 1.930

3.  Pesticide detection combining the Wasserstein generative adversarial network and the residual neural network based on terahertz spectroscopy.

Authors:  Ruizhao Yang; Yun Li; Binyi Qin; Di Zhao; Yongjin Gan; Jincun Zheng
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 3.361

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.