| Literature DB >> 34014382 |
Yunchao Yin1, Derya Yakar1, Rudi A J O Dierckx1, Kim B Mouridsen1,2, Thomas C Kwee1, Robbert J de Haas3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Deep learning has been proven to be able to stage liver fibrosis based on contrast-enhanced CT images. However, until now, the algorithm is used as a black box and lacks transparency. This study aimed to provide a visual-based explanation of the diagnostic decisions made by deep learning.Entities:
Keywords: Algorithms; Deep learning; Liver cirrhosis; Neural networks, computer; Tomography, X-ray computed
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34014382 PMCID: PMC8589780 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08046-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1Flowchart of patient inclusion. Abbreviation: CT = computed tomography
Fig. 2Overall scheme of liver fibrosis staging by deep learning. The computed tomography (CT) scan was first pre-processed by tissue windowing and standardized to [0,1]. Then, 32 consecutive slices of the 3D segmented liver were randomly selected as a patch per training iteration to feed into the convolutional neural network. The network put out the array of predicted probabilities at fibrosis stage (F0–F4). During testing of the trained liver fibrosis staging network, Grad-Cam was integrated between the third convolutional layer and the final convolutional layer to generate the maps showing the location of the network’s focus. Abbreviations: CT: computed tomography; Conv: convolutional layer; Max_pool: maximum pooling layer; GradCam: Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping; 5*5 kernel: a kernel with size [5] is used to extract features in the convolutional layer; channel: number of kernels applied in between convolutional layers; Softmax: softmax activation function
Demographics of the study population
| Variable | Total cohort | Liver fibrosis stage | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F0 | F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | |||
| Total number of patients | 252 | 134 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 82 | |
| Median age (interquartile range) | 59 (48–65) | 63 (50–74) | 64 (38–71) | 57 (43–64) | 48 (43–62) | 60 (54–65) | |
| Gender | Male | 140 (55.6%) | 68 (50.7%) | 3 (37.5%s) | 7 (70.0%) | 11 (61.1%) | 51 (62.2%) |
| Female | 112 (44.4%) | 66 (49.3%) | 5 (62.5%) | 3 (30.0%) | 7 (38.9%) | 31 (37.8%) | |
| Origin of histopathology specimen | Biopsy | 39 (33.1%) | - | 7 | 6 | 6 | 17 |
| Resection | 5 (4.2%) | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
| Transplantation | 74 (62.7%) | - | 1 | 4 | 12 | 57 | |
| Etiology of liver fibrosis | Alcoholic | 26 (22.0%) | - | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 |
| Autoimmune hepatitis | 5 (4.2%) | - | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
| HBV | 3 (2.5%) | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | |
| HCV | 10 (8.5%) | - | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | |
| PSC | 3 (2.5%) | - | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| Steatohepatitis | 8 (6.8%) | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | |
| Wilson disease | 1 (0.8%) | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| Other | 17 (14.4%) | - | 1 | 0 | 7 | 9 | |
| Unknown | 45 (38.1) | - | 7 | 7 | 7 | 24 | |
Abbreviations: HBV = hepatitis B virus; HCV = hepatitis C virus; PSC = primary sclerosing cholangitis
Fig. 3Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the test sets. a ROC curves of the predicted liver fibrosis severity on the test sets, including significant fibrosis, advanced fibrosis, and cirrhosis. b Macro-averaged ROC curve reducing the F0–F4 stages’ classification to multiple sets of two-class classifications, and micro-averaged ROC curve averaging each sample of an aggregate result
Summary of the performance of the liver fibrosis staging network in predicting liver fibrosis severity in the test set. The corresponding receiver operating characteristic curves can be found in Fig. 3
| Significant fibrosis (F2–F4) | Advanced fibrosis (F3–F4) | Cirrhosis (F4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUC | 0.92 [0.86, 0.97] | 0.89 [0.83, 0.96] | 0.88 [0.79, 0.94] |
| Specificity (%; 95% CI) | 91.7 [82.0, 96.8] | 88.2 [77.8, 95.6] | 86.5 [78.9, 94.4] |
| Sensitivity (%; 95% CI) | 83.0 [71.7, 94.7] | 79.5 [68.2, 92.5] | 75.1 [56.5, 86.7] |
| Accuracy (%; 95% CI) | 88.3 [81.5, 94.5] | 85.2 [77.0, 92.0] | 83.3 [76.2, 90.0] |
Abbreviations: AUC = area under the curve; CI = confidence interval
Fig. 4a Shown are location maps overlaid on axial computed tomography images of the upper abdomen at different levels in patients without liver fibrosis (stage F0). The liver surface is highlighted in these location maps, which indicates that information exploited from the liver surface contributed to the convolutional neural network's prediction of F0 liver fibrosis. b Shown are location maps overlaid on axial computed tomography images of the upper abdomen at different levels in patients with cirrhosis (stage F4). The liver parenchyma and spleen are highlighted in these location maps, which indicates that information exploited from the liver parenchyma and spleen contributed to the convolutional neural network’s prediction of F4 liver fibrosis (cirrhosis)
Fig. 5Distribution of mean weights assigned by the liver fibrosis staging (LFS) network in the liver parenchyma on the location maps. The weights represent the importance of the liver parenchyma on CT for the LFS network when making diagnostic decisions. The two groups are divided according to the liver fibrosis stage predicted by the LFS network