24 March 2016 Detection of soft tissue densities from digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of conventional and deep learning approaches
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Computer-aided detection (CAD) has been used in screening mammography for many years and is likely to be utilized for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Higher detection performance is desirable as it may have an impact on radiologist's decisions and clinical outcomes. Recently the algorithms based on deep convolutional architectures have been shown to achieve state of the art performance in object classification and detection. Similarly, we trained a deep convolutional neural network directly on patches sampled from two-dimensional mammography and reconstructed DBT volumes and compared its performance to a conventional CAD algorithm that is based on computation and classification of hand-engineered features. The detection performance was evaluated on the independent test set of 344 DBT reconstructions (GE SenoClaire 3D, iterative reconstruction algorithm) containing 328 suspicious and 115 malignant soft tissue densities including masses and architectural distortions. Detection sensitivity was measured on a region of interest (ROI) basis at the rate of five detection marks per volume. Moving from conventional to deep learning approach resulted in increase of ROI sensitivity from 0:832 ± 0:040 to 0:893 ± 0:033 for suspicious ROIs; and from 0:852 ± 0:065 to 0:930 ± 0:046 for malignant ROIs. These results indicate the high utility of deep feature learning in the analysis of DBT data and high potential of the method for broader medical image analysis tasks.
© (2016) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Sergei V. Fotin, Sergei V. Fotin, Yin Yin, Yin Yin, Hrishikesh Haldankar, Hrishikesh Haldankar, Jeffrey W. Hoffmeister, Jeffrey W. Hoffmeister, Senthil Periaswamy, Senthil Periaswamy, } "Detection of soft tissue densities from digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of conventional and deep learning approaches", Proc. SPIE 9785, Medical Imaging 2016: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 97850X (24 March 2016); doi: 10.1117/12.2217045; https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2217045
PROCEEDINGS
6 PAGES


SHARE
Back to Top