Cargando…

Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network

BACKGROUND: We aimed to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) guided identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions from the whole-body bone scintigraphy (WBS) images by convolutional neural networks (CNNs). METHODS: We retrospectively collected the (99m)Tc-MDP WBS images with confirmed bo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Yemei, Yang, Pei, Pi, Yong, Jiang, Lisha, Zhong, Xiao, Cheng, Junjun, Xiang, Yongzhao, Wei, Jianan, Li, Lin, Yi, Zhang, Cai, Huawei, Zhao, Zhen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8417997/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34481459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00662-9
_version_ 1783748490366550016
author Liu, Yemei
Yang, Pei
Pi, Yong
Jiang, Lisha
Zhong, Xiao
Cheng, Junjun
Xiang, Yongzhao
Wei, Jianan
Li, Lin
Yi, Zhang
Cai, Huawei
Zhao, Zhen
author_facet Liu, Yemei
Yang, Pei
Pi, Yong
Jiang, Lisha
Zhong, Xiao
Cheng, Junjun
Xiang, Yongzhao
Wei, Jianan
Li, Lin
Yi, Zhang
Cai, Huawei
Zhao, Zhen
author_sort Liu, Yemei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We aimed to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) guided identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions from the whole-body bone scintigraphy (WBS) images by convolutional neural networks (CNNs). METHODS: We retrospectively collected the (99m)Tc-MDP WBS images with confirmed bone lesions from 3352 patients with malignancy. 14,972 bone lesions were delineated manually by physicians and annotated as benign and malignant. The lesion-based differentiating performance of the proposed network was evaluated by fivefold cross validation, and compared with the other three popular CNN architectures for medical imaging. The average sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. To delve the outcomes of this study, we conducted subgroup analyses, including lesion burden number and tumor type for the classifying ability of the CNN. RESULTS: In the fivefold cross validation, our proposed network reached the best average accuracy (81.23%) in identifying suspicious bone lesions compared with InceptionV3 (80.61%), VGG16 (81.13%) and DenseNet169 (76.71%). Additionally, the CNN model's lesion-based average sensitivity and specificity were 81.30% and 81.14%, respectively. Based on the lesion burden numbers of each image, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.847 in the few group (lesion number n ≤ 3), 0.838 in the medium group (n = 4–6), and 0.862 in the extensive group (n > 6). For the three major primary tumor types, the CNN-based lesion identifying AUC value was 0.870 for lung cancer, 0.900 for prostate cancer, and 0.899 for breast cancer. CONCLUSION: The CNN model suggests potential in identifying suspicious benign and malignant bone lesions from whole-body bone scintigraphic images. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12880-021-00662-9.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8417997
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84179972021-09-09 Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network Liu, Yemei Yang, Pei Pi, Yong Jiang, Lisha Zhong, Xiao Cheng, Junjun Xiang, Yongzhao Wei, Jianan Li, Lin Yi, Zhang Cai, Huawei Zhao, Zhen BMC Med Imaging Research BACKGROUND: We aimed to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) guided identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions from the whole-body bone scintigraphy (WBS) images by convolutional neural networks (CNNs). METHODS: We retrospectively collected the (99m)Tc-MDP WBS images with confirmed bone lesions from 3352 patients with malignancy. 14,972 bone lesions were delineated manually by physicians and annotated as benign and malignant. The lesion-based differentiating performance of the proposed network was evaluated by fivefold cross validation, and compared with the other three popular CNN architectures for medical imaging. The average sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. To delve the outcomes of this study, we conducted subgroup analyses, including lesion burden number and tumor type for the classifying ability of the CNN. RESULTS: In the fivefold cross validation, our proposed network reached the best average accuracy (81.23%) in identifying suspicious bone lesions compared with InceptionV3 (80.61%), VGG16 (81.13%) and DenseNet169 (76.71%). Additionally, the CNN model's lesion-based average sensitivity and specificity were 81.30% and 81.14%, respectively. Based on the lesion burden numbers of each image, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.847 in the few group (lesion number n ≤ 3), 0.838 in the medium group (n = 4–6), and 0.862 in the extensive group (n > 6). For the three major primary tumor types, the CNN-based lesion identifying AUC value was 0.870 for lung cancer, 0.900 for prostate cancer, and 0.899 for breast cancer. CONCLUSION: The CNN model suggests potential in identifying suspicious benign and malignant bone lesions from whole-body bone scintigraphic images. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12880-021-00662-9. BioMed Central 2021-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8417997/ /pubmed/34481459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00662-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Liu, Yemei
Yang, Pei
Pi, Yong
Jiang, Lisha
Zhong, Xiao
Cheng, Junjun
Xiang, Yongzhao
Wei, Jianan
Li, Lin
Yi, Zhang
Cai, Huawei
Zhao, Zhen
Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title_full Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title_fullStr Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title_full_unstemmed Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title_short Automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
title_sort automatic identification of suspicious bone metastatic lesions in bone scintigraphy using convolutional neural network
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8417997/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34481459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00662-9
work_keys_str_mv AT liuyemei automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT yangpei automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT piyong automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT jianglisha automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT zhongxiao automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT chengjunjun automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT xiangyongzhao automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT weijianan automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT lilin automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT yizhang automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT caihuawei automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork
AT zhaozhen automaticidentificationofsuspiciousbonemetastaticlesionsinbonescintigraphyusingconvolutionalneuralnetwork