Computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer based on deep neural networks from multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging
Zhenglin Yi,Zhenyu Ou,Jiao Hu,Dongxu Qiu,Chao Quan,Belaydi Othmane,Yongjie Wang,Longxiang Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.918381
2022-08-29
Abstract:Objectives: To evaluate a new deep neural network (DNN)-based computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) method, namely, a prostate cancer localization network and an integrated multi-modal classification network, to automatically localize prostate cancer on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and classify prostate cancer and non-cancerous tissues. Materials and methods: The PROSTAREx database consists of a "training set" (330 suspected lesions from 204 cases) and a "test set" (208 suspected lesions from 104 cases). Sequences include T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, Ktrans, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) images. For the task of abnormal localization, inspired by V-net, we designed a prostate cancer localization network with mp-MRI data as input to achieve automatic localization of prostate cancer. Combining the concepts of multi-modal learning and ensemble learning, the integrated multi-modal classification network is based on the combination of mp-MRI data as input to distinguish prostate cancer from non-cancerous tissues through a series of operations such as convolution and pooling. The performance of each network in predicting prostate cancer was examined using the receiver operating curve (ROC), and the area under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity (TPR), specificity (TNR), accuracy, and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) were calculated. Results: The prostate cancer localization network exhibited excellent performance in localizing prostate cancer, with an average error of only 1.64 mm compared to the labeled results, an error of about 6%. On the test dataset, the network had a sensitivity of 0.92, specificity of 0.90, PPV of 0.91, NPV of 0.93, and DSC of 0.84. Compared with multi-modal classification networks, the performance of single-modal classification networks is slightly inadequate. The integrated multi-modal classification network performed best in classifying prostate cancer and non-cancerous tissues with a TPR of 0.95, TNR of 0.82, F1-Score of 0.8920, AUC of 0.912, and accuracy of 0.885, which fully confirmed the feasibility of the ensemble learning approach. Conclusion: The proposed DNN-based prostate cancer localization network and integrated multi-modal classification network yielded high performance in experiments, demonstrating that the prostate cancer localization network and integrated multi-modal classification network can be used for computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) of prostate cancer localization and classification.