Breast cancer diagnosis from contrast-enhanced mammography using multi-feature fusion neural network

被引:9
作者
Qian, Nini [1 ]
Jiang, Wei [1 ,2 ]
Guo, Yu [1 ]
Zhu, Jian [3 ]
Qiu, Jianfeng [4 ]
Yu, Hui [1 ]
Huang, Xian [1 ]
机构
[1] Tianjin Univ, Sch Precis Instrument & Optoelect Engn, Dept Biomed Engn, Tianjin 300072, Peoples R China
[2] Yantai Yuhuangding Hosp, Dept Radiotherapy, 20 Yuhuangding East Rd, Yantai 264000, Shandong, Peoples R China
[3] Shandong Canc Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol Phys & Technol, Jiyan Rd, Jinan 250117, Shandong, Peoples R China
[4] Shandong First Med Univ & Shandong Acad Med Sci, Med Engn & Technol Res Ctr, Tai An 271000, Shandong, Peoples R China
关键词
Breast neoplasms; Mammography; Deep learning; Contrast media; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; PERFORMANCE; MRI; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-023-10170-9
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
ObjectivesTo develop an end-to-end deep neural network for the classification of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) images to facilitate breast cancer diagnosis in the clinic.MethodsIn this retrospective mono-centric study, patients who underwent CEM examinations from January 2019 to August 2021 were enrolled. A multi-feature fusion network combining low-energy (LE) and dual-energy subtracted (DES) images and dual view, as well as bilateral information, was trained and tested using a large CEM dataset with a diversity of breast tumors for breast lesion classification. Its generalization performance was further evaluated on two external datasets. Results were reported using AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.ResultsA total of 2496 patients (mean age, 53 years & PLUSMN; 12 (standard deviation)) were included and divided into a training set (1718), a validation set (255), and a testing set (523). The proposed CEM-based multi-feature fusion network achieved the best diagnosis performance with an AUC of 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95, 0.97), compared with the no-fusion model, the left-right fusion model, and the multi-feature fusion network with only LE image inputs. Our models reached an AUC of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.94) on a full-field digital mammograph (FFDM) external dataset (86 patients), and an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.95) on a CEM external dataset (193 patients).ConclusionThe developed multi-feature fusion neural network achieved high performance in CEM image classification and was able to facilitate CEM-based breast cancer diagnosis.Clinical relevance statementCompared with low-energy images, CEM images have greater sensitivity and similar specificity in malignant breast lesion detection. The multi-feature fusion neural network is a promising computer-aided diagnostic tool for the clinical diagnosis of breast cancer.Key Points & BULL; Deep convolutional neural networks have the potential to facilitate contrast-enhanced mammography-based breast cancer diagnosis.& BULL; The multi-feature fusion neural network reaches high accuracies in the classification of contrast-enhanced mammography images.& BULL; The developed model is a promising diagnostic tool to facilitate clinical breast cancer diagnosis.Key Points & BULL; Deep convolutional neural networks have the potential to facilitate contrast-enhanced mammography-based breast cancer diagnosis.& BULL; The multi-feature fusion neural network reaches high accuracies in the classification of contrast-enhanced mammography images.& BULL; The developed model is a promising diagnostic tool to facilitate clinical breast cancer diagnosis.Key Points & BULL; Deep convolutional neural networks have the potential to facilitate contrast-enhanced mammography-based breast cancer diagnosis.& BULL; The multi-feature fusion neural network reaches high accuracies in the classification of contrast-enhanced mammography images.& BULL; The developed model is a promising diagnostic tool to facilitate clinical breast cancer diagnosis.
引用
收藏
页码:917 / 927
页数:11
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [11] Jeukens CRLPN, 2019, CONTRAST ENHANCED MA, P23
  • [12] Contrast-enhanced Mammography: State of the Art
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    Lobbes, Marc B., I
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2021, 299 (01) : 36 - 48
  • [13] Bilateral Contrast-enhanced Dual-Energy Digital Mammography: Feasibility and Comparison with Conventional Digital Mammography and MR Imaging in Women with Known Breast Carcinoma
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    Dershaw, D. David
    Sung, Janice S.
    Heerdt, Alexandra S.
    Thornton, Cynthia
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Ferrara, Jessica
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2013, 266 (03) : 743 - 751
  • [14] Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: Initial clinical experience
    Jong, RA
    Yaffe, MJ
    Skarpathiotakis, M
    Shumak, RS
    Danjoux, NM
    Gunesekara, A
    Plewes, DB
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2003, 228 (03) : 842 - 850
  • [15] Categorized contrast enhanced mammography dataset for diagnostic and artificial intelligence research
    Khaled, Rana
    Helal, Maha
    Alfarghaly, Omar
    Mokhtar, Omnia
    Elkorany, Abeer
    El Kassas, Hebatalla
    Fahmy, Aly
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC DATA, 2022, 9 (01)
  • [16] Lalji U, 2014, WOMENS HEALTH, V10, P289, DOI [10.2217/whe.14.18, 10.2217/WHE.14.18]
  • [17] Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Comparison of Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography and Breast MR Imaging in the Evaluation of Extent of Disease
    Lee-Felker, Stephanie A.
    Tekchandani, Leena
    Thomas, Mariam
    Gupta, Esha
    Andrews-Tang, Denise
    Roth, Antoinette
    Sayre, James
    Rahbar, Guita
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2017, 285 (02) : 389 - 400
  • [18] Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: Feasibility
    Lewin, JM
    Isaacs, PK
    Vance, V
    Larke, FJ
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2003, 229 (01) : 261 - 268
  • [19] Contrast enhanced mammography: Techniques, current results, and potential indications
    Lobbes, M. B. I.
    Smidt, M. L.
    Houwers, J.
    Tjan-Heijnen, V. C.
    Wildberger, J. E.
    [J]. CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 68 (09) : 935 - 944
  • [20] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in patients referred from the breast cancer screening programme
    Lobbes, Marc B. I.
    Lalji, Ulrich
    Houwers, Janneke
    Nijssen, Estelle C.
    Nelemans, Patty J.
    van Roozendaal, Lori
    Smidt, Marjolein L.
    Heuts, Esther
    Wildberger, Joachim E.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (07) : 1668 - 1676