Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comprehensive analysis of clinical images contributions for melanoma classification using convolutional neural networks.
Rios-Duarte, Jorge A; Diaz-Valencia, Andres C; Combariza, Germán; Feles, Miguel; Peña-Silva, Ricardo A.
Affiliation
  • Rios-Duarte JA; School of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
  • Diaz-Valencia AC; School of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
  • Combariza G; Department of Mathematics, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
  • Feles M; Department of Mathematics, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
  • Peña-Silva RA; School of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Skin Res Technol ; 30(5): e13607, 2024 May.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38742379
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Timely diagnosis plays a critical role in determining melanoma prognosis, prompting the development of deep learning models to aid clinicians. Questions persist regarding the efficacy of clinical images alone or in conjunction with dermoscopy images for model training. This study aims to compare the classification performance for melanoma of three types of CNN models those trained on clinical images, dermoscopy images, and a combination of paired clinical and dermoscopy images from the same lesion. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

We divided 914 image pairs into training, validation, and test sets. Models were built using pre-trained Inception-ResNetV2 convolutional layers for feature extraction, followed by binary classification. Training comprised 20 models per CNN type using sets of random hyperparameters. Best models were chosen based on validation AUC-ROC.

RESULTS:

Significant AUC-ROC differences were found between clinical versus dermoscopy models (0.661 vs. 0.869, p < 0.001) and clinical versus clinical + dermoscopy models (0.661 vs. 0.822, p = 0.001). Significant sensitivity differences were found between clinical and dermoscopy models (0.513 vs. 0.799, p = 0.01), dermoscopy versus clinical + dermoscopy models (0.799 vs. 1.000, p = 0.02), and clinical versus clinical + dermoscopy models (0.513 vs. 1.000, p < 0.001). Significant specificity differences were found between dermoscopy versus clinical + dermoscopy models (0.800 vs. 0.288, p < 0.001) and clinical versus clinical + dermoscopy models (0.650 vs. 0.288, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION:

CNN models trained on dermoscopy images outperformed those relying solely on clinical images under our study conditions. The potential advantages of incorporating paired clinical and dermoscopy images for CNN-based melanoma classification appear less clear based on our findings.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Skin Neoplasms / Neural Networks, Computer / Dermoscopy / Melanoma Limits: Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Skin Res Technol Journal subject: DERMATOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Colombia Country of publication: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Skin Neoplasms / Neural Networks, Computer / Dermoscopy / Melanoma Limits: Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Skin Res Technol Journal subject: DERMATOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Colombia Country of publication: United kingdom