Source author record

Katja Pinker

Katja Pinker appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Radiologist-level Performance by Using Deep Learning for Segmentation of Breast Cancers on MRI Scans

Purpose: To develop a deep network architecture that would achieve fully automated radiologist-level segmentation of cancers at breast MRI. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 38229 examinations (composed of 64063 individual breast scans from 14475 patients) were performed in female patients (age range, 12-94 years; mean age, 52 years +/- 10 [standard deviation]) who presented between 2002 and 2014 at a single clinical site. A total of 2555 breast cancers were selected that had been segmented on two-dimensional (2D) images by radiologists, as well as 60108 benign breasts that served as examples of noncancerous tissue; all these were used for model training. For testing, an additional 250 breast cancers were segmented independently on 2D images by four radiologists. Authors selected among several three-dimensional (3D) deep convolutional neural network architectures, input modalities, and harmonization methods. The outcome measure was the Dice score for 2D segmentation, which was compared between the network and radiologists by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the two one-sided test procedure. Results: The highest-performing network on the training set was a 3D U-Net with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as input and with intensity normalized for each examination. In the test set, the median Dice score of this network was 0.77 (interquartile range, 0.26). The performance of the network was equivalent to that of the radiologists (two one-sided test procedures with radiologist performance of 0.69-0.84 as equivalence bounds, P <= .001 for both; n = 250). Conclusion: When trained on a sufficiently large dataset, the developed 3D U-Net performed as well as fellowship-trained radiologists in detailed 2D segmentation of breast cancers at routine clinical MRI.