| Literature DB >> 36262625 |
Mohamed Meselhy Eltoukhy1, Khalid M Hosny2, Mohamed A Kassem3.
Abstract
Pathologists need a lot of clinical experience and time to do the histopathological investigation. AI may play a significant role in supporting pathologists and resulting in more accurate and efficient histopathological diagnoses. Breast cancer is one of the most diagnosed cancers in women worldwide. Breast cancer may be detected and diagnosed using imaging methods such as histopathological images. Since various tissues make up the breast, there is a wide range of textural intensity, making abnormality detection difficult. As a result, there is an urgent need to improve computer-assisted systems (CAD) that can serve as a second opinion for radiologists when they use medical images. A self-training learning method employing deep learning neural network with residual learning is proposed to overcome the issue of needing a large number of labeled images to train deep learning models in breast cancer histopathology image classification. The suggested model is built from scratch and trained.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36262625 PMCID: PMC9576372 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9086060
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Max-pooling layer process [12].
Figure 2The proposed deep network.
Figure 3Sample images.
The distribution of BreakHis images into four magnification levels for both main tumor categories and each subcategory.
| Main category | Magnification level | Benign | Total benign | Malignant | Total malignant | Total of both | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subcategory | A | F | TA | PT | DC | LC | MC | PC | ||||
| Number of images at each magnification level | X40 | 114 | 253 | 109 | 149 | 625 | 864 | 156 | 205 | 145 | 1370 | 1995 |
| X100 | 113 | 260 | 121 | 150 | 644 | 903 | 170 | 222 | 142 | 1437 | 2081 | |
| X200 | 111 | 264 | 108 | 140 | 623 | 896 | 163 | 196 | 135 | 1390 | 2013 | |
| X400 | 106 | 237 | 115 | 130 | 588 | 788 | 137 | 169 | 138 | 1232 | 1820 | |
| Total | 444 | 1014 | 453 | 569 | 2480 | 3451 | 626 | 792 | 560 | 5429 | 7909 | |
Figure 4The overall process of the proposed method.
The confusion matrix of the classification results of BreakHis dataset using magnification 40x images.
|
|
The confusion matrix of the classification results of BreakHis dataset using magnification 100x images.
|
|
The confusion matrix of the classification results of BreakHis dataset using magnification 200x images.
|
|
The confusion matrix of the classification results of BreakHis dataset using magnification 400x images.
|
|
Figure 5ROC curve of the classification results of BreakHis dataset using different magnification ratios. (a) ROC curve of magnification 40x. (b) ROC curve of magnification 100x. (c) ROC curve of magnification 200x. (d) ROC curve of magnification 400x.
The obtained result of the proposed method for classifying the BreakHis dataset for all magnifying factors.
| Average (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40x | 100x | 200x | 400x | |
| Precision | 85.2 | 80 | 79.9 | 81.6 |
| Sensitivity | 85.2 | 79.1 | 79.9 | 80.7 |
| Specificity | 97.9 | 97.1 | 97.1 | 97.4 |
| Accuracy | 96.3 | 95 | 95 | 95.4 |
The obtained result of the proposed method for classifying the BreakHis dataset for all magnifying factors.
| Method | Accuracy % | |
|---|---|---|
| Asare et al. [ | Inception_ResNetV2 with a Softmax as a classifier | 91.72 |
| Mi et al. [ | Inception V3 with a Softmax as a classifier | 85.19 |
| Alkassar et al. [ | Inception network with an ECmax as a classifier | 89.58 |
| Boumaraf et al. [ | ResNet-18 with a Softmax as a classifier | 92.03 |
| Zerouaoui and Idri [ | DenseNet 201 with a MLP as a classifier | 92.57 |
| Liu et al. [ | ResNet-18 with a Softmax as a classifier | 93.24 |
|
|
|
|
Figure 6Results visualization for different methods.