Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Li, Chunxiaoa; 1 | Zhang, Huilib; 1 | Chen, Jinga | Shao, Sihuia | Li, Xina | Yao, Minghuaa | Zheng, Yia | Wu, Ronga; * | Shi, Junb; *
Affiliations: [a] Department of Ultra sound, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Hongkou District, Shanghai, China | [b] School of Communication and Information Engineering, Shanghai University, Baoshan District, Shanghai, China
Correspondence: [*] Corresponding authors: Jun Shi and Rong Wu. E-mails: [email protected]; [email protected].
Note: [1] Chunxiao Li and Huili Zhang contributed equally to this work and are co-first authors.
Abstract: OBJECTIVES:The purpose of our study is to present a method combining radiomics with deep learning and clinical data for improved differential diagnosis of sclerosing adenosis (SA)and breast cancer (BC). METHODS:A total of 97 patients with SA and 100 patients with BC were included in this study. The best model for classification was selected from among four different convolutional neural network (CNN) models, including Vgg16, Resnet18, Resnet50, and Desenet121. The intra-/inter-class correlation coefficient and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method were used for radiomics feature selection. The clinical features selected were patient age and nodule size. The overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under curve (AUC) value were calculated for comparison of diagnostic efficacy. RESULTS:All the CNN models combined with radiomics and clinical data were significantly superior to CNN models only. The Desenet121+radiomics+clinical data model showed the best classification performance with an accuracy of 86.80%, sensitivity of 87.60%, specificity of 86.20% and AUC of 0.915, which was better than that of the CNN model only, which had an accuracy of 85.23%, sensitivity of 85.48%, specificity of 85.02%, and AUC of 0.870. In comparison, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC value for breast radiologists were 72.08%, 100%, 43.30%, and 0.716, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:A combination of the CNN-radiomics model and clinical data could be a helpful auxiliary diagnostic tool for distinguishing between SA and BC.
Keywords: Deep learning, radiomics, breast cancer, sclerosing adenosis
DOI: 10.3233/CH-221608
Journal: Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 153-163, 2023
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
[email protected]
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office [email protected]
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: [email protected]