Back

Improving discriminative ability in mammographic microcalcification classification using deep learning: a novel double transfer learning approach validated with an explainable artificial intelligence technique

Arlan, K.; Bjornstrom, M.; Makela, T.; Meretoja, T. J.; Hukkinen, K.

2025-08-11 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2025.08.05.25332967 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundBreast microcalcification diagnostics are challenging due to their subtle presentation, overlapping with benign findings, and high inter-reader variability, often leading to unnecessary biopsies. While deep learning (DL) models - particularly deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) - have shown potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, their clinical application remains limited by the need for large annotated datasets and the "black box" nature of their decision-making. PurposeTo develop and validate a deep learning model (DCNN) using a double transfer learning (d-TL) strategy for classifying suspected mammographic microcalcifications, with explainable AI (XAI) techniques to support model interpretability. Material and methodsA retrospective dataset of 396 annotated regions of interest (ROIs) from full-field digital mammography (FFDM) images of 194 patients who underwent stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy at the Womens Hospital radiological department, Helsinki University Hospital, was collected. The dataset was randomly split into training and test sets (24% test set, balanced for benign and malignant cases). A ResNeXt-based DCNN was developed using a d-TL approach: first pretrained on ImageNet, then adapted using an intermediate mammography dataset before fine-tuning on the target microcalcification data. Saliency maps were generated using Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) to evaluate the visual relevance of model predictions. Diagnostic performance was compared to a radiologists BI-RADS-based assessment, using final histopathology as the reference standard. ResultsThe ensemble DCNN achieved an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.76, with 65% sensitivity, 83% specificity, 79% positive predictive value (PPV), and 70% accuracy. The radiologist achieved an AUC of 0.65 with 100% sensitivity but lower specificity (30%) and PPV (59%). Grad-CAM visualizations showed consistent activation of the correct ROIs, even in misclassified cases where confidence scores fell below the threshold. ConclusionThe DCNN model utilizing d-TL achieved performance comparable to radiologists, with higher specificity and PPV than BI-RADS. The approach addresses data limitation issues and may help reduce additional imaging and unnecessary biopsies.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.3%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 4%
10.8%
3
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.7%
4
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.5%
5
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.7%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 42%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.8%
8
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
9
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
10
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
11
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
12
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.8%
13
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.8%
14
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
15
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
16
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
17
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
18
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
19
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
20
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
21
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
22
Photoacoustics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
23
IEEE Access
31 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
24
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
25
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
27
Expert Systems with Applications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
28
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
171 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
29
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
30
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%