A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Pre and post-hoc diagnosis and interpretation of malignancy from breast DCE-MRI. | LitMetric

We propose a new method for breast cancer screening from DCE-MRI based on a post-hoc approach that is trained using weakly annotated data (i.e., labels are available only at the image level without any lesion delineation). Our proposed post-hoc method automatically diagnosis the whole volume and, for positive cases, it localizes the malignant lesions that led to such diagnosis. Conversely, traditional approaches follow a pre-hoc approach that initially localises suspicious areas that are subsequently classified to establish the breast malignancy - this approach is trained using strongly annotated data (i.e., it needs a delineation and classification of all lesions in an image). We also aim to establish the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches when applied to breast screening from DCE-MRI. Relying on experiments on a breast DCE-MRI dataset that contains scans of 117 patients, our results show that the post-hoc method is more accurate for diagnosing the whole volume per patient, achieving an AUC of 0.91, while the pre-hoc method achieves an AUC of 0.81. However, the performance for localising the malignant lesions remains challenging for the post-hoc method due to the weakly labelled dataset employed during training.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2019.101562DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

post-hoc method
12
breast dce-mri
8
screening dce-mri
8
approach trained
8
annotated data
8
malignant lesions
8
breast
5
method
5
pre post-hoc
4
post-hoc diagnosis
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!