Literature DB >> 35988097

Classifying presence or absence of calcifications on mammography using generative contribution mapping.

Tatsuaki Kobayashi1, Takafumi Haraguchi2, Tomoharu Nagao3.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to verify the efficacy of generative contribution mapping (GCM), an explainable deep learning model for images, in classifying the presence or absence of calcifications on mammography. The learning dataset consisted of 303 full-field digital mammography (FFDM) images labeled with microcalcifications obtained from the public INbreast database without extremely dense images. FFDM images were divided into calcification and non-calcification patch images using a sliding window method with 25% overlap. The patch images of the mediolateral oblique (MLO) and craniocaudal (CC) views were divided into a training set of 70%, a validation set of 10%, and a testing set of 20%. The classification performance of GCM classifiers was evaluated and compared with that of EfficientNet classifiers. Visualization maps of GCM highlighted regions of interest more clearly than EfficientNet's gradient-weighted class activation maps. The results showed that GCM classifiers yielded an accuracy of 0.92 (CC), 0.91 (MLO), and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.92 (CC), 0.94 (MLO). In conclusion, GCM could accurately classify the presence or absence of calcifications on mammograms and explain intuitively reasonable grounds for their classification with visualization maps highlighting regions of interest.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Japanese Society of Radiological Technology and Japan Society of Medical Physics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Explainable artificial intelligence; Generative contribution mapping; Mammography; Microcalcifications

Year:  2022        PMID: 35988097     DOI: 10.1007/s12194-022-00673-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol        ISSN: 1865-0333


  14 in total

1.  Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography.

Authors:  L J Warren Burhenne; S A Wood; C J D'Orsi; S A Feig; D B Kopans; K F O'Shaughnessy; E A Sickles; L Tabar; C J Vyborny; R A Castellino
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Convolutional neural networks for breast cancer detection in mammography: A survey.

Authors:  Leila Abdelrahman; Manal Al Ghamdi; Fernando Collado-Mesa; Mohamed Abdel-Mottaleb
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 4.589

3.  Computer-assisted analysis of mammographic clustered calcifications.

Authors:  I M Freundlich; T B Hunter; G W Seeley; C J D'Orsi; N L Sadowsky
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 4.  Microcalcification on mammography: approaches to interpretation and biopsy.

Authors:  Louise Wilkinson; Val Thomas; Nisha Sharma
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Detection and classification of the breast abnormalities in digital mammograms via regional Convolutional Neural Network.

Authors:  M A Al-Masni; M A Al-Antari; J M Park; G Gi; T Y Kim; P Rivera; E Valarezo; S-M Han; T-S Kim
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2017-07

6.  Breast calcifications: mammographic evaluation.

Authors:  E A Sickles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Simultaneous detection and classification of breast masses in digital mammograms via a deep learning YOLO-based CAD system.

Authors:  Mohammed A Al-Masni; Mugahed A Al-Antari; Jeong-Min Park; Geon Gi; Tae-Yeon Kim; Patricio Rivera; Edwin Valarezo; Mun-Taek Choi; Seung-Moo Han; Tae-Seong Kim
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison.

Authors:  M Lee Spangler; Margarita L Zuley; Jules H Sumkin; Gordan Abrams; Marie A Ganott; Christiane Hakim; Ronald Perrin; Denise M Chough; Ratan Shah; David Gur
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts.

Authors:  Marco Rosselli Del Turco; Paola Mantellini; Stefano Ciatto; Rita Bonardi; Francesca Martinelli; Barbara Lazzari; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Mammographic predictors of the presence and size of invasive carcinomas associated with malignant microcalcification lesions without a mass.

Authors:  Paul C Stomper; Joseph Geradts; Stephen B Edge; Ellis G Levine
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.