Deep learning based identification of bone scintigraphies containing metastatic bone disease foci

Abdalla Ibrahim, Akshayaa Vaidyanathan, Sergey Primakov, Flore Belmans, Fabio Bottari, Turkey Refaee, Pierre Lovinfosse, Alexandre Jadoul, Celine Derwael, Fabian Hertel, Henry C Woodruff, Helle D Zacho, Sean Walsh, Wim Vos, Mariaelena Occhipinti, François-Xavier Hanin, Philippe Lambin, Felix M Mottaghy, Roland Hustinx, Abdalla Ibrahim, Akshayaa Vaidyanathan, Sergey Primakov, Flore Belmans, Fabio Bottari, Turkey Refaee, Pierre Lovinfosse, Alexandre Jadoul, Celine Derwael, Fabian Hertel, Henry C Woodruff, Helle D Zacho, Sean Walsh, Wim Vos, Mariaelena Occhipinti, François-Xavier Hanin, Philippe Lambin, Felix M Mottaghy, Roland Hustinx

Abstract

Purpose: Metastatic bone disease (MBD) is the most common form of metastases, most frequently deriving from prostate cancer. MBD is screened with bone scintigraphy (BS), which have high sensitivity but low specificity for the diagnosis of MBD, often requiring further investigations. Deep learning (DL) - a machine learning technique designed to mimic human neuronal interactions- has shown promise in the field of medical imaging analysis for different purposes, including segmentation and classification of lesions. In this study, we aim to develop a DL algorithm that can classify areas of increased uptake on bone scintigraphy scans.

Methods: We collected 2365 BS from three European medical centres. The model was trained and validated on 1203 and 164 BS scans respectively. Furthermore we evaluated its performance on an external testing set composed of 998 BS scans. We further aimed to enhance the explainability of our developed algorithm, using activation maps. We compared the performance of our algorithm to that of 6 nuclear medicine physicians.

Results: The developed DL based algorithm is able to detect MBD on BSs, with high specificity and sensitivity (0.80 and 0.82 respectively on the external test set), in a shorter time compared to the nuclear medicine physicians (2.5 min for AI and 30 min for nuclear medicine physicians to classify 134 BSs). Further prospective validation is required before the algorithm can be used in the clinic.

Keywords: Activation maps; Bone scintigraphy; Deep learning; Metastatic bone disease.

Conflict of interest statement

Akshayaa Vaidyanathan, Flore Belmans, Fabio Bottari are salaried employees of Radiomics.

The rest of co-authors declare no competing interest.

© 2023. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Example of pre-processed BS scans used as input for model training
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The architecture used in the study. Pre-processed BS scans resized to 512 * 512 dimensions were provided as input to the network. The network outputs a probability score for presence and absence of metastasis on BS images. X = block repetitions, Conv = Convolution kernel, ReLU = rectified linear unit, 3 × 3 = the size of the 2D CNN kernels
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Screenshot of the application feedback window used in the in silico trial
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
ROC curve for the classification DL model (left) and Confusion matrix (right)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
BS images which are correctly classified along with their corresponding activation maps extracted using the GRAD-CAM method. Left) original BD scan, Right) Grad-CAM activation maps obtained from the DL model. Scan correctly classified with a probability of 0.78 (top) and 0.99 (bottom)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
BS images which are wrongly classified along with their corresponding activation maps extracted using the GRAD-CAM method. Left) original BD scan, Right) Grad-CAM activation maps obtained from the DL model. Scan incorrectly classified with a probability of 0.79 (top) and 0.63 (bottom)
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Violin plots showing the distributions of AUC scores for DL based and manual (across physicians) metastases detection on BS (left); boxplots of the log of the time needed by DL algorithm and nuclear medicine physicians (right)

References

    1. Coleman RE. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin cancer Res an Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res United States. 2006;12:6243s–9. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0931.
    1. Migliorini F, Maffulli N, Trivellas A, Eschweiler J, Tingart M, Driessen A. Bone metastases: a comprehensive review of the literature. Mol Biol Rep [Internet]. Department of Orthopaedics, University Clinic Aachen, RWTH Aachen University Clinic, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. @gmail.com.; 2020;47:6337–45. Available from:
    1. Huang J-F, Shen J, Li X, Rengan R, Silvestris N, Wang M et al. Incidence of patients with bone metastases at diagnosis of solid tumors in adults: a large population-based study. Ann Transl Med [Internet]. AME Publishing Company; 2020;8:482. Available from:
    1. Coleman RE. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev Netherlands. 2001;27:165–76. doi: 10.1053/ctrv.2000.0210.
    1. Macedo F, Ladeira K, Pinho F, Saraiva N, Bonito N, Pinto L, et al. Bone metastases: an overview. Oncol Rev. 2017;11:321.
    1. Ryan PJ, Fogelman I. Bone scintigraphy in metabolic bone disease. Semin Nucl Med United States. 1997;27:291–305. doi: 10.1016/S0001-2998(97)80030-X.
    1. Ziessman HA, O’Malley JP, Thrall JHBT-NM, Fourth E, editors., editors. Chapter 7 - Skeletal Scintigraphy. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2014. p. 98–130. Available from:
    1. Van den Wyngaert T, Strobel K, Kampen WU, Kuwert T, van der Bruggen W, Mohan HK, et al. The EANM practice guidelines for bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1723–38. doi: 10.1007/s00259-016-3415-4.
    1. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G. Deep learning. Nature [Internet]. 2015;521:436–44. Available from: 10.1038/nature14539
    1. McCulloch WS, Pitts W. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull Math Biophys [Internet]. 1943;5:115–33. Available from: 10.1007/BF02478259
    1. Deng L. A tutorial survey of architectures, algorithms, and applications for deep learning. APSIPA Trans Signal Inf Process [Internet]. 2014/01/22. Cambridge University Press; 2014;3:e2. Available from: 962FA37F8EC684B209E3DFAE
    1. Aslam YNS. A Review of Deep Learning Approaches for Image Analysis. Int Conf Smart Syst Inven Technol. 2019;2019:709–14.
    1. Janocha K, Czarnecki WM. On loss functions for deep neural networks in classification. Schedae Informaticae. 2016;25:49–59.
    1. Cheng D.-C, Hsieh T.-C, Yen K.-Y, Kao C.-H. Lesion-Based Bone Metastasis Detection in Chest Bone Scintigraphy Images of Prostate Cancer Patients Using Pre-Train, Negative Mining, and Deep Learning. Diagnostics. 2021;11:518. 10.3390/diagnostics11030518.
    1. Papandrianos, N.; Papageorgiou, E.; Anagnostis, A.; Papageorgiou, K. Efficient Bone Metastasis Diagnosis in Bone Scintigraphy Using a Fast Convolutional Neural Network Architecture. Diagnostics. 2020;10:532. 10.3390/diagnostics10080532.
    1. Aoki Y, Nakayama M, Nomura K, Tomita Y, Nakajima K, Yamashina M, et al. The utility of a deep learning-based algorithm for bone scintigraphy in patient with prostate cancer. Ann Nucl Med Japan. 2020;34:926–31. doi: 10.1007/s12149-020-01524-0.
    1. Selvaraju RR, Cogswell M, Das A, Vedantam R, Parikh D, Batra D. Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-Based Localization. Int J Comput Vis [Internet]. 2020;128:336–59. Available from: 10.1007/s11263-019-01228-7
    1. Dubost F, Adams H, Yilmaz P, Bortsova G, van Tulder G, Ikram MA et al. Weakly supervised object detection with 2D and 3D regression neural networks. Med Image Anal [Internet]. 2020;65:101767. Available from:
    1. Selvaraju RR, Cogswell M, Das A, Vedantam R, Parikh D, Batra D. Grad-CAM: visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. Int J Comput Vis Springer. 2016;128:336–59. doi: 10.1007/s11263-019-01228-7.
    1. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA United States. 2013;310:2191–4.
    1. Simonyan, K. and Zisserman, A. (2015) Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition. The 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR2015). .
    1. Shorten C, Khoshgoftaar TM. A survey on Image Data Augmentation for Deep Learning. J Big Data [Internet]. 2019;6:60. Available from: 10.1186/s40537-019-0197-0
    1. Calin O, Activation Functions BT. - Deep Learning Architectures: A Mathematical Approach. In: Calin O, editor. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 21–39. Available from: 10.1007/978-3-030-36721-3_2
    1. Kingma, D. and Ba, J. (2015) Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2015). .
    1. Mongan J, Moy L, Kahn CE. Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM): A Guide for Authors and Reviewers. Radiol Artif Intell [Internet]. Radiological Society of North America; 2020;2:e200029. Available from: 10.1148/ryai.2020200029
    1. Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Hooft L et al. STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open [Internet]. 2016;6:e012799. Available from:
    1. Liu S, Feng M, Qiao T, Cai H, Xu K, Yu X, et al. Deep learning for the Automatic diagnosis and analysis of bone metastasis on bone scintigrams. Cancer Manag Res. 2022;14:51–65. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S340114.
    1. Han S, Oh J.S, Lee J.J. Diagnostic performance of deep learning models for detecting bone metastasis on whole-body bone scan in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:585–595. 10.1007/s00259-021-05481-2.
    1. Anand A, Morris MJ, Kaboteh R, Båth L, Sadik M, Gjertsson P, et al. Analytic Validation of the automated bone scan index as an imaging biomarker to standardize quantitative changes in bone scans of patients with metastatic prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:41–5. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.115.160085.
    1. Narasinga Rao MR, Venkatesh Prasad D, Sai Teja V, Zindavali P, Phanindra Reddy M. A Survey on Prevention of Overfitting in Convolution neural networks using machine learning techniques. Int J Eng Technol. 2018;7:177. doi: 10.14419/ijet.v7i2.32.15399.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj