| Literature DB >> 33785808 |
Chung-Hsuan Hsu1, Wei-Shiang Chen1, Yu-Bai Chou2,3, Shih-Jen Chen2,3, De-Kuang Hwang2,3, Yi-Ming Huang2,3, An-Fei Li3,4, Henry Horng-Shing Lu5.
Abstract
Polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) share some similarity in clinical imaging manifestations. However, their disease entity and treatment strategy as well as visual outcomes are very different. To distinguish these two vision-threatening diseases is somewhat challenging but necessary. In this study, we propose a new artificial intelligence model using an ensemble stacking technique, which combines a color fundus photograph-based deep learning (DL) model and optical coherence tomography-based biomarkers, for differentiation of PCV from nAMD. Furthermore, we introduced multiple correspondence analysis, a method of transforming categorical data into principal components, to handle the dichotomous data for combining with another image DL system. This model achieved a robust performance with an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 83.67%, 80.76%, 84.72%, and 88.57%, respectively, by training nearly 700 active cases with suitable imaging quality and transfer learning architecture. This work could offer an alternative method of developing a multimodal DL model, improve its efficiency for distinguishing different diseases, and facilitate the broad application of medical engineering in a DL model design.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33785808 PMCID: PMC8010118 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86526-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Framework of model training. The flowchart revealed the framework of model training by combining CFPs and OCT biomarkers. First, the CFPs were trained by EfficientNet model to obtain prediction value. Second, the OCT biomarkers were labelled by retinal specialist and then were dimension-reduced and transformed to principal components by multiple correspondence analysis (MCA). Third, merging the two steps to achieve the final results by stacking technique. Abbreviation: MCA multiple correspondence analysis.
Validation performance of CFPs-based model.
| Average accuracy | Standard deviation of accuracy | Average AUC |
|---|---|---|
| 0.8070 | 0.0076 | 0.8355 |
In the first step of this study, we trained and validated the model only with color fundus photographs (CFPs).
Prediction performance of testing dataset in CFPs-based model.
| Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|
| 0.7755 | 0.7692 | 0.7777 |
The performance in testing was around 77% in each evaluation metrics.
Figure 5Five-fold cross-validation. This figure showed the way of five-fold cross-validation and how the dataset was split into five subsets.
Figure 2ROC curve in CFPs-based model. The area under curve (AUC) in this EfficientNet model by CFPs was 83.55%.
Characteristic distribution of OCT biomarkers in PCV and nAMD subjects.
| Group | Biomarkers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Double layer sign (%) | Triple layer sign (%) | Notch-PED (%) | M-shape PED (%) | Thumb sign (%) | Bubble/ring sign (including strings-of-pearl sign) (%) | |
| PCV (208 eyes) | 78.5 | 59.2 | 25 | 15.4 | 7.3 | 7.3 |
| nAMD (491 eyes) | 45.2 | 35.6 | 13.2 | 2.8 | 10 | 1 |
This table revealed the characteristic distribution of OCT biomarkers in nAMD and PCV group.
Figure 3Conversion of categorical OCT biomarkers into different numbers of MCA components. The y axis showed the explained variance ratio, whereas the x axis showed the number of multiple correspondence components. It revealed that the first four components possessed nearly 80% explained variation.
Comparison of prediction performance in testing dataset between CFP-based model and the model combining CFPs and OCT biomarkers with stacking technique.
| Model | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|
| CFP-based | 0.7755 | 0.7692 | 0.7777 |
| CFP + OCT biomarkers | 0.8367 | 0.8076 | 0.8472 |
After combining OCT biomarkers with stacking technique, the testing performance can improved to 83.67% in accuracy, 80.76% in sensitivity, and 84.72% in specificity.
Figure 4ROC curve of final prediction model in combination of CFPs and OCT biomarkers. The area under curve (AUC) showed 88.57%.
Figure 6Feature engineering. This figure revealed the process of feature engineering in OCT biomarkers and CFPs with training (left) and testing (right) datasets.
Figure 7Ensemble stacking technique. It was used to combine two different information from separate feature engineering, CFPs and OCT biomarkers, and then to choose differernt learning models (including XGBoost, LightGBM, and CatBoost) to create new features by stacking technique for final prediction.