Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31691121›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2020

Digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography: integration of image modalities enhances deep learning-based breast mass classification.

Xin Li, Genggeng Qin, Qiang He, Lei Sun, Hui Zeng, Zilong He, Weiguo Chen, Xin Zhen, Linghong Zhou

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Xin LiSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Genggeng QinDepartment of Radiology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Qiang HeSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Lei SunSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Hui ZengDepartment of Radiology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Zilong HeDepartment of Radiology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Weiguo ChenDepartment of Radiology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Xin ZhenSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China. xinzhen@smu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5037-2801
Linghong ZhouSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China. smart@smu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China 2017YFC0112900National Natural Science Foundation of China 81728016National Natural Science Foundation of China 81874216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the impact of utilizing digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) or/and full-field digital mammography (FFDM), and different transfer learning strategies on deep convolutional neural network (DCNN)-based mass classification for breast cancer.

methodsWe retrospectively collected 441 patients with both DBT and FFDM on which regions of interest (ROIs) covering the malignant, benign and normal tissues were extracted for DCNN training and validation. Experiments were conducted for tasks in distinguishing malignant/benign/normal: (1) classification capabilities of DBT vs FFDM and the role of transfer learning were validated on 2D-DCNN; (2) different strategies of combining DBT and FFDM and the associated impacts on classification were explored; (3) 2D-DCNN and 3D-DCNN trained from scratch with volumetric DBT were compared.

results2D-DCNN with transfer learning outperformed that without for DBT in distinguishing malignant (ΔAUC = 0.059 ± 0.009, p < 0.001), benign (ΔAUC = 0.095 ± 0.010, p < 0.001) and normal tissue (ΔAUC = 0.042 ± 0.004, p < 0.001) (paired samples t test). 2D-DCNN trained on DBT (with transfer learning) achieved higher accuracy than those on FFDM (malignant: ΔAUC = 0.014 ± 0.014, p = 0.037; benign: ΔAUC = 0.031 ± 0.006, p < 0.001; normal: ΔAUC = 0.017 ± 0.004, p < 0.001) (independent samples t test). The 2D-DCNN employing both DBT and FFDM for training achieved better performances in benign (FFDM: ΔAUC = 0.010 ± 0.008, p < 0.001; DBT: ΔAUC = 0.009 ± 0.005, p < 0.001) and normal (FFDM: ΔAUC = 0.005 ± 0.003, p < 0.001; DBT: ΔAUC = 0.002 ± 0.002, p < 0.001) (related samples Friedman test). The 3D-DCNN and 2D-DCNN trained from scratch with DBT only produced moderate classification.

conclusionsTransfer learning facilitates mass classification for both DBT and FFDM, and DBT outperforms FFDM when equipped with transfer learning. Integrating DBT and FFDM in DCNN training enhances mass classification accuracy for breast cancer. KEY POINTS: • Transfer learning facilitates mass classification for both DBT and FFDM, and the DBT-based DCNN outperforms the FFDM-based DCNN when equipped with transfer learning. • Integrating DBT and FFDM in DCNN training enhances breast mass classification accuracy. • 3D-DCNN/2D-DCNN trained from scratch with volumetric DBT but without transfer learning only produce moderate mass classification result.

Indexed as

Deep LearningAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreastBreast NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMachine LearningMammographyMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedBreastClassificationDeep learningMammographyNeural network (computer)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.