Automatic classification of ultrasound breast lesions using a deep convolutional neural network mimicking human decision-making

被引:96
作者
Ciritsis, Alexander [1 ]
Rossi, Cristina [1 ]
Eberhard, Matthias [1 ]
Marcon, Magda [1 ]
Becker, Anton S. [1 ]
Boss, Andreas [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Zurich, Inst Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, Ramistr 100, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
Ultrasound; Breast; Artificial intelligence; Machine learning; BI-RADS; CANCER; MAMMOGRAPHY; FEATURES; NODULES; BENIGN; BIOPSY; IMAGES; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-019-06118-7
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
Objectives To evaluate a deep convolutional neural network (dCNN) for detection, highlighting, and classification of ultrasound (US) breast lesions mimicking human decision-making according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Methods and materials One thousand nineteen breast ultrasound images from 582 patients (age 56.3 +/- 11.5 years) were linked to the corresponding radiological report. Lesions were categorized into the following classes: no tissue, normal breast tissue, BI-RADS 2 (cysts, lymph nodes), BI-RADS 3 (non-cystic mass), and BI-RADS 4-5 (suspicious). To test the accuracy of the dCNN, one internal dataset (101 images) and one external test dataset (43 images) were evaluated by the dCNN and two independent readers. Radiological reports, histopathological results, and follow-up examinations served as reference. The performances of the dCNN and the humans were quantified in terms of classification accuracies and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results In the internal test dataset, the classification accuracy of the dCNN differentiating BI-RADS 2 from BI-RADS 3-5 lesions was 87.1% (external 93.0%) compared with that of human readers with 79.2 +/- 1.9% (external 95.3 +/- 2.3%). For the classification of BI-RADS 2-3 versus BI-RADS 4-5, the dCNN reached a classification accuracy of 93.1% (external 95.3%), whereas the classification accuracy of humans yielded 91.6 +/- 5.4% (external 94.1 +/- 1.2%). The AUC on the internal dataset was 83.8 (external 96.7) for the dCNN and 84.6 +/- 2.3 (external 90.9 +/- 2.9) for the humans. Conclusion dCNNs may be used to mimic human decision-making in the evaluation of single US images of breast lesion according to the BI-RADS catalog. The technique reaches high accuracies and may serve for standardization of highly observer-dependent US assessment.
引用
收藏
页码:5458 / 5468
页数:11
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Advances in Oncologic Imaging Update on 5 Common Cancers
    Akin, Oguz
    Brennan, Sandra B.
    Dershaw, D. David
    Ginsberg, Michelle S.
    Gollub, Marc J.
    Schoeder, Heiko
    Panicek, David M.
    Hricak, Hedvig
    [J]. CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2012, 62 (06) : 364 - 393
  • [2] [Anonymous], BR J RADIOL
  • [3] [Anonymous], I CLIN EC REV
  • [4] [Anonymous], BR J RADIOL
  • [5] [Anonymous], MED IMAGING 2016 IMA
  • [6] Classification of Breast Tumors Using Sonographic Texture Analysis
    Ardakani, Ali Abbasian
    Gharbali, Akbar
    Mohammadi, Afshin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2015, 34 (02) : 225 - 231
  • [7] Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer
    Berg, Wendie A.
    Blume, Jeffrey D.
    Cormack, Jean B.
    Mendelson, Ellen B.
    Lehrer, Daniel
    Bohm-Velez, Marcela
    Pisano, Etta D.
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Evans, W. Phil
    Morton, Marilyn J.
    Mahoney, Mary C.
    Larsen, Linda Hovanessian
    Barr, Richard G.
    Farria, Dione M.
    Marques, Helga S.
    Boparai, Karan
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2008, 299 (18): : 2151 - 2163
  • [8] Detection of Breast Cancer With Addition of Annual Screening Ultrasound or a Single Screening MRI to Mammography in Women With Elevated Breast Cancer Risk
    Berg, Wendie A.
    Zhang, Zheng
    Lehrer, Daniel
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Pisano, Etta D.
    Barr, Richard G.
    Boehm-Velez, Marcela
    Mahoney, Mary C.
    Evans, W. Phil, III
    Larsen, Linda H.
    Morton, Marilyn J.
    Mendelson, Ellen B.
    Farria, Dione M.
    Cormack, Jean B.
    Marques, Helga S.
    Adams, Amanda
    Yeh, Nolin M.
    Gabrielli, Glenna
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2012, 307 (13): : 1394 - 1404
  • [9] Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects
    Boyd, Norman F.
    Martin, Lisa J.
    Yaffe, Martin J.
    Minkin, Salomon
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2011, 13 (06)
  • [10] Bradski G., 2000, Opencv. Dr. Dobb's J. Softw. Tools, V3