Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31228956›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2019

Deep learning networks find unique mammographic differences in previous negative mammograms between interval and screen-detected cancers: a case-case study.

Benjamin Hinton, Lin Ma, Amir Pasha Mahmoudzadeh, Serghei Malkov, Bo Fan, Heather Greenwood, Bonnie Joe, Vivian Lee, Karla Kerlikowske, John Shepherd

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin HintonDepartment of Bioengineering, University of California-San Francisco Berkeley Joint Program, Room A-C106-B, 1 Irving St, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. bhinton@berkeley.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9587-5536
Lin MaKaiser Permanente Division of Research, Oakland, CA, USA.
Amir Pasha MahmoudzadehAccenture, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Serghei MalkovApplied Materials, Santa Clara, CA, USA.
Bo FanDepartment of Bioengineering, University of California-San Francisco Berkeley Joint Program, Room A-C106-B, 1 Irving St, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Heather GreenwoodDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, UC-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Bonnie JoeDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, UC-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Vivian LeeResearch Advocate, UCSF Breast Science Advocacy Core, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Karla KerlikowskeDepartments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
John ShepherdCancer Epidemiology, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · USAccenture (United States) · USApplied Materials (United States) · USKaiser Permanente · USUniversity of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa · US

Funding

Risk-based Imaging Strategies to Improve Breast Cancer Surveillance OutcomesP01CA154292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KARLA M KERLIKOWSKE · 2011 to 2026
$52.9M
Lesion Composition and Quantitative Imaging Analysis on Breast Cancer DiagnosisR01CA166945 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI GIGER, MARYELLEN L., SHEPHERD, JOHN ALAN · 2013 to 2017
$3.3M
California Breast Cancer Research Program 21IB-0130National Science Foundation 1144247NCI NIH HHS P01 CA154292NIH HHS P01CA154292NIH HHS R01CA166945
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo determine if mammographic features from deep learning networks can be applied in breast cancer to identify groups at interval invasive cancer risk due to masking beyond using traditional breast density measures.

methodsFull-field digital screening mammograms acquired in our clinics between 2006 and 2015 were reviewed. Transfer learning of a deep learning network with weights initialized from ImageNet was performed to classify mammograms that were followed by an invasive interval or screen-detected cancer within 12 months of the mammogram. Hyperparameter optimization was performed and the network was visualized through saliency maps. Prediction loss and accuracy were calculated using this deep learning network. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) values were generated with the outcome of interval cancer using the deep learning network and compared to predictions from conditional logistic regression with errors quantified through contingency tables.

resultsPre-cancer mammograms of 182 interval and 173 screen-detected cancers were split into training/test cases at an 80/20 ratio. Using Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density alone, the ability to correctly classify interval cancers was moderate (AUC = 0.65). The optimized deep learning model achieved an AUC of 0.82. Contingency table analysis showed the network was correctly classifying 75.2% of the mammograms and that incorrect classifications were slightly more common for the interval cancer mammograms. Saliency maps of each cancer case found that local information could highly drive classification of cases more than global image information.

conclusionsPre-cancerous mammograms contain imaging information beyond breast density that can be identified with deep learning networks to predict the probability of breast cancer detection.

Indexed as

Deep LearningBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLimit of DetectionMammographyBreast CancerBreast densityDeep learningInterval CancerMammographyMaskingNeural networkTransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID31228956
PMCPMC6589178
OpenAlexW2952050763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.