| Literature DB >> 35206347 |
Koushlendra Kumar Singh1, Suraj Kumar1, Marios Antonakakis2, Konstantina Moirogiorgou2, Anirudh Deep1, Kanchan Lata Kashyap3, Manish Kumar Bajpai4, Michalis Zervakis2.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. It is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women in 140 countries out of 184 reporting countries. Lesions of breast cancer are abnormal areas in the breast tissues. Various types of breast cancer lesions include (1) microcalcifications, (2) masses, (3) architectural distortion, and (4) bilateral asymmetry. Microcalcification can be classified as benign, malignant, and benign without a callback. In the present manuscript, we propose an automatic pipeline for the detection of various categories of microcalcification. We performed deep learning using convolution neural networks (CNNs) for the automatic detection and classification of all three categories of microcalcification. CNN was applied using four different optimizers (ADAM, ADAGrad, ADADelta, and RMSProp). The input images of a size of 299 × 299 × 3, with fully connected RELU and SoftMax output activation functions, were utilized in this study. The feature map was obtained using the pretrained InceptionResNetV2 model. The performance evaluation of our classification scheme was tested on a curated breast imaging subset of the DDSM mammogram dataset (CBIS-DDSM), and the results were expressed in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC). Our proposed classification scheme outperforms the ability of previously used deep learning approaches and classical machine learning schemes.Entities:
Keywords: biomedical imaging; cancer; convolution neural network; mammograms; microcalcification
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35206347 PMCID: PMC8871762 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042159
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
The number of images used in each class.
| Training | Testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Benign_without_callback | 474 | 99 |
| Benign | 528 | 133 |
| Malignant | 545 | 94 |
Figure 1(a) Original mammogram images taken from DDSM dataset; (b) cropped ROI images of original images; (c) resized ROI images of size 299 × 299.
Figure 2Proposed convolutional neural network architecture.
Figure 3Architecture of CNN model.
Architecture of transfer learning model (InceptionResNetV2) with various optimizers.
| Optimizer | Input Shape | Fully Connected Neurons | Fully Connected Activation Function | Output | Output Activation Function |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adam | 299 × 299 × 3 | 128 | Relu | 3 | Softmax |
| AdaGrad | |||||
| AdaDelta | |||||
| RMSProp |
Figure 4Output obtained using ADAM optimizer: (a) loss function; (b) accuracy; (c) sensitivity.
Figure 5Output obtained using ADAGrad optimizer: (a) loss function; (b) accuracy; (c) sensitivity.
Figure 6Output obtained using ADADelta optimizer: (a) loss function; (b) accuracy; (c) sensitivity.
Figure 7Output obtained using RMSProp optimizer: (a) loss function; (b) accuracy; (c) sensitivity.
Validation results of various models with a learning rate of 0.0001 and a batch size of 32, with model names and loss functions.
| Model | Loss Function | Optimizer | Training Loss | Training Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_ Divergence | ADAM | 0.1134 | 0.9813 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_ Divergence | ADAGrad | 0.0212 | 0.9813 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_ Divergence | ADADelta | 0.1293 | 0.9816 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_ Divergence | RMSProp | 0.1193 | 0.9810 |
Validation result of various models with a learning rate of 0.0001 and a batch size of 32 with InceptionResNetV2 Model and Kullback_Leibler_ Divergence loss function.
| Model | Loss Function | Optimizer | Loss | Accuracy | AUC | Sensitivity at Specificity 0.8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_Divergence | ADAM | 0.21 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.96 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_Divergence | ADAGrad | 0.67 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_Divergence | ADADelta | 0.28 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.97 |
| Inception ResNetV2 | Kullback_Leibler_Divergence | RMSProp | 0.32 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.95 |
| SVM(RBF Kernel function) | - | - | - | 0.91 | 0.90 | 91 |
| k-NN | 0.89 | 0.88 | 0.89 |
Comparison of the proposed model with existing techniques.
| Article | Model | Accuracy (%) | AUC | Sensitivity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ribli et al. [ | faster R-CNN | 0.92 | 0.95 | 96 |
| Arevalo et al. [ | CNN | 0.90 | 0.82 | 85 |
| Dhungel et al. [ | CNN | 0.92 | 0.93 | 98 |
| Becker et al. [ | CNN | 81 | 0.89 | 87 |
| Proposed DL model with ADAM | Inception ResNetV2 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.96 |
| Proposed work DL model with ADAGrad | Inception ResNetV2 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 |
| Proposed work DL model with ADADelta | Inception ResNetV2 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.97 |
| Proposed work DL model with RMSProp | Inception ResNetV2 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.95 |