评估卵巢肿瘤恶性风险的机器学习模型:一项比较研究。

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY Journal of Ovarian Research Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1186/s13048-024-01544-8
Xin He, Xiang-Hui Bai, Hui Chen, Wei-Wei Feng
{"title":"评估卵巢肿瘤恶性风险的机器学习模型:一项比较研究。","authors":"Xin He, Xiang-Hui Bai, Hui Chen, Wei-Wei Feng","doi":"10.1186/s13048-024-01544-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of the machine learning models with expert subjective assessment (SA) in assessing the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors using transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The retrospective single-center diagnostic study included 1555 consecutive patients from January 2019 to May 2021. Using this dataset, Residual Network(ResNet), Densely Connected Convolutional Network(DenseNet), Vision Transformer(ViT), and Swin Transformer models were established and evaluated separately or combined with Cancer antigen 125 (CA 125). The diagnostic performance was then compared with SA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1555 patients, 76.9% were benign, while 23.1% were malignant (including borderline). When differentiating the malignant from ovarian tumors, the SA had an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.93-0.99), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 98.4%. Except for Vision Transformer, other machine learning models had diagnostic performance comparable to that of the expert. The DenseNet model had an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95), sensitivity of 84.6%, and specificity of 95.1%. The ResNet50 model had an AUC of 0.91 (0.85-0.95). The Swin Transformer model had an AUC of 0.92 (0.87-0.96), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 94.3%. There was a statistically significant difference between the Vision Transformer and SA, and between the Vision Transformer and Swin Transformer models (AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.97, P = 0.01; AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.92, P = 0.04). Adding CA125 did not improve the diagnostic performance of the models in distinguishing benign and malignant ovarian tumors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The deep learning model of TVUS can be used in ovarian cancer evaluation, and its diagnostic performance is comparable to that of expert assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":16610,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ovarian Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11539702/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine learning models in evaluating the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors: a comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Xin He, Xiang-Hui Bai, Hui Chen, Wei-Wei Feng\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13048-024-01544-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of the machine learning models with expert subjective assessment (SA) in assessing the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors using transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The retrospective single-center diagnostic study included 1555 consecutive patients from January 2019 to May 2021. Using this dataset, Residual Network(ResNet), Densely Connected Convolutional Network(DenseNet), Vision Transformer(ViT), and Swin Transformer models were established and evaluated separately or combined with Cancer antigen 125 (CA 125). The diagnostic performance was then compared with SA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1555 patients, 76.9% were benign, while 23.1% were malignant (including borderline). When differentiating the malignant from ovarian tumors, the SA had an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.93-0.99), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 98.4%. Except for Vision Transformer, other machine learning models had diagnostic performance comparable to that of the expert. The DenseNet model had an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95), sensitivity of 84.6%, and specificity of 95.1%. The ResNet50 model had an AUC of 0.91 (0.85-0.95). The Swin Transformer model had an AUC of 0.92 (0.87-0.96), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 94.3%. There was a statistically significant difference between the Vision Transformer and SA, and between the Vision Transformer and Swin Transformer models (AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.97, P = 0.01; AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.92, P = 0.04). Adding CA125 did not improve the diagnostic performance of the models in distinguishing benign and malignant ovarian tumors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The deep learning model of TVUS can be used in ovarian cancer evaluation, and its diagnostic performance is comparable to that of expert assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Ovarian Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11539702/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Ovarian Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-024-01544-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ovarian Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-024-01544-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的该研究旨在比较机器学习模型与专家主观评估(SA)在使用经阴道超声(TVUS)评估卵巢肿瘤恶性风险方面的诊断效果:这项回顾性单中心诊断研究纳入了2019年1月至2021年5月期间的1555例连续患者。利用该数据集,建立了残差网络(ResNet)、密集连接卷积网络(DenseNet)、视觉变换器(ViT)和Swin变换器模型,并分别与癌症抗原125(CA 125)结合进行了评估。然后将其诊断性能与 SA 进行了比较:在 1555 例患者中,76.9% 为良性,23.1% 为恶性(包括边缘性)。在区分恶性与卵巢肿瘤时,SA 的 AUC 为 0.97(95% CI,0.93-0.99),灵敏度为 87.2%,特异度为 98.4%。除Vision Transformer外,其他机器学习模型的诊断性能与专家相当。DenseNet 模型的 AUC 为 0.91(95% CI,0.86-0.95),灵敏度为 84.6%,特异度为 95.1%。ResNet50 模型的 AUC 为 0.91(0.85-0.95)。Swin Transformer 模型的 AUC 为 0.92(0.87-0.96),灵敏度为 87.2%,特异性为 94.3%。Vision Transformer 和 SA 之间以及 Vision Transformer 和 Swin Transformer 模型之间的差异具有统计学意义(AUC:0.87 vs. 0.97,P = 0.01;AUC:0.87 vs. 0.92,P = 0.04)。加入 CA125 并没有提高模型在区分良性和恶性卵巢肿瘤方面的诊断性能:TVUS深度学习模型可用于卵巢癌评估,其诊断性能与专家评估相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Machine learning models in evaluating the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors: a comparative study.

Objectives: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of the machine learning models with expert subjective assessment (SA) in assessing the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors using transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS).

Methods: The retrospective single-center diagnostic study included 1555 consecutive patients from January 2019 to May 2021. Using this dataset, Residual Network(ResNet), Densely Connected Convolutional Network(DenseNet), Vision Transformer(ViT), and Swin Transformer models were established and evaluated separately or combined with Cancer antigen 125 (CA 125). The diagnostic performance was then compared with SA.

Results: Of the 1555 patients, 76.9% were benign, while 23.1% were malignant (including borderline). When differentiating the malignant from ovarian tumors, the SA had an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.93-0.99), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 98.4%. Except for Vision Transformer, other machine learning models had diagnostic performance comparable to that of the expert. The DenseNet model had an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95), sensitivity of 84.6%, and specificity of 95.1%. The ResNet50 model had an AUC of 0.91 (0.85-0.95). The Swin Transformer model had an AUC of 0.92 (0.87-0.96), sensitivity of 87.2%, and specificity of 94.3%. There was a statistically significant difference between the Vision Transformer and SA, and between the Vision Transformer and Swin Transformer models (AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.97, P = 0.01; AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.92, P = 0.04). Adding CA125 did not improve the diagnostic performance of the models in distinguishing benign and malignant ovarian tumors.

Conclusion: The deep learning model of TVUS can be used in ovarian cancer evaluation, and its diagnostic performance is comparable to that of expert assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Ovarian Research
Journal of Ovarian Research REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.50%
发文量
125
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Ovarian Research is an open access, peer reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a forum for high-quality basic and clinical research on ovarian function, abnormalities, and cancer. The journal focuses on research that provides new insights into ovarian functions as well as prevention and treatment of diseases afflicting the organ. Topical areas include, but are not restricted to: Ovary development, hormone secretion and regulation Follicle growth and ovulation Infertility and Polycystic ovarian syndrome Regulation of pituitary and other biological functions by ovarian hormones Ovarian cancer, its prevention, diagnosis and treatment Drug development and screening Role of stem cells in ovary development and function.
期刊最新文献
A novel ITGB8 transcript variant sustains ovarian cancer cell survival through genomic instability and altered ploidy on a mutant p53 background. Machine learning models in evaluating the malignancy risk of ovarian tumors: a comparative study. ATF3 mediates PM2.5-induced apoptosis and inflammation in ovarian granulosa cells. Causal relationship between inflammatory cytokines and polycystic ovary syndrome: a bidirectional mendelian randomization study. Implication of vasopressin receptor genes (AVPR1A and AVPR1B) in the susceptibility to polycystic ovary syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1