| 1. |
- Haenssle, H A, et al.
(författare)
-
Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists.
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 29:8, s. 1836-1842
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Deep learning convolutional neural networks (CNN) may facilitate melanoma detection, but data comparing a CNN's diagnostic performance to larger groups of dermatologists are lacking.Google's Inception v4 CNN architecture was trained and validated using dermoscopic images and corresponding diagnoses. In a comparative cross-sectional reader study a 100-image test-set was used (level-I: dermoscopy only; level-II: dermoscopy plus clinical information and images). Main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) for diagnostic classification (dichotomous) of lesions by the CNN versus an international group of 58 dermatologists during level-I or -II of the reader study. Secondary end points included the dermatologists' diagnostic performance in their management decisions and differences in the diagnostic performance of dermatologists during level-I and -II of the reader study. Additionally, the CNN's performance was compared with the top-five algorithms of the 2016 International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) challenge.In level-I dermatologists achieved a mean (±standard deviation) sensitivity and specificity for lesion classification of 86.6% (±9.3%) and 71.3% (±11.2%), respectively. More clinical information (level-II) improved the sensitivity to 88.9% (±9.6%, P = 0.19) and specificity to 75.7% (±11.7%, P < 0.05). The CNN ROC curve revealed a higher specificity of 82.5% when compared with dermatologists in level-I (71.3%, P < 0.01) and level-II (75.7%, P < 0.01) at their sensitivities of 86.6% and 88.9%, respectively. The CNN ROC AUC was greater than the mean ROC area of dermatologists (0.86 versus 0.79, P < 0.01). The CNN scored results close to the top three algorithms of the ISBI 2016 challenge.For the first time we compared a CNN's diagnostic performance with a large international group of 58 dermatologists, including 30 experts. Most dermatologists were outperformed by the CNN. Irrespective of any physicians' experience, they may benefit from assistance by a CNN's image classification.This study was registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS-Study-ID: DRKS00013570; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/).
|
|
| 2. |
- Tschandl, Philipp, et al.
(författare)
-
Expert-Level Diagnosis of Nonpigmented Skin Cancer by Combined Convolutional Neural Networks.
- 2019
-
Ingår i: JAMA dermatology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6084 .- 2168-6068. ; 55:1, s. 58-65
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) achieve expert-level accuracy in the diagnosis of pigmented melanocytic lesions. However, the most common types of skin cancer are nonpigmented and nonmelanocytic, and are more difficult to diagnose.To compare the accuracy of a CNN-based classifier with that of physicians with different levels of experience.A CNN-based classification model was trained on 7895 dermoscopic and 5829 close-up images of lesions excised at a primary skin cancer clinic between January 1, 2008, and July 13, 2017, for a combined evaluation of both imaging methods. The combined CNN (cCNN) was tested on a set of 2072 unknown cases and compared with results from 95 human raters who were medical personnel, including 62 board-certified dermatologists, with different experience in dermoscopy.The proportions of correct specific diagnoses and the accuracy to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions measured as an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve served as main outcome measures.Among 95 human raters (51.6% female; mean age, 43.4 years; 95% CI, 41.0-45.7 years), the participants were divided into 3 groups (according to years of experience with dermoscopy): beginner raters (<3 years), intermediate raters (3-10 years), or expert raters (>10 years). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the trained cCNN was higher than human ratings (0.742; 95% CI, 0.729-0.755 vs 0.695; 95% CI, 0.676-0.713; P < .001). The specificity was fixed at the mean level of human raters (51.3%), and therefore the sensitivity of the cCNN (80.5%; 95% CI, 79.0%-82.1%) was higher than that of human raters (77.6%; 95% CI, 74.7%-80.5%). The cCNN achieved a higher percentage of correct specific diagnoses compared with human raters (37.6%; 95% CI, 36.6%-38.4% vs 33.5%; 95% CI, 31.5%-35.6%; P = .001) but not compared with experts (37.3%; 95% CI, 35.7%-38.8% vs 40.0%; 95% CI, 37.0%-43.0%; P = .18).Neural networks are able to classify dermoscopic and close-up images of nonpigmented lesions as accurately as human experts in an experimental setting.
|
|
