Yingjie Feng1, Junbo Zhao1, Huai Chen2, Xiaoyin Xu3, and Min Zhang1
1Zhejiang Univerisity, Hangzhou, China, 2The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China, 3Brigham and Women's Hospital,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
Synopsis
Malignant brain tumor affects a large number of patients and often have poor prognosis and low response to therapeutics. An indicator of the progress of brain tumor and its response to treatment is the DNA repair protein, O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT). As such, accurate assessment of MGMT is of great clinical significance. Biospy is not only invasive but also has the risk of undersampling the tumorous tissue. We presented a novel deep learning model that uses multi-MRI modalities to assess the expression of MGMT in glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Results showed that the model can achieve good performance.
Introduction
GBM is the most
popular malignant brain tumor and has a poor prognosis. Most GBM patients have
a survival of less than one year. MGMT promotor methylation has been shown to
be a prognostic factor that affects the length of survival of GBM patients and
indicates how likely a GBM may respond to alkylating chemotherapy. As such,
assessing the status of MGMT in GBM patients is of significant clinical
importance. Current practice requires biopsy and genetic analysis, a process
that, in addition to be invasive, can take days to complete. It is therefore
beneficial to develop methods for predicting MGMT expression using brain
imaging1 (Figure1). We presented a deep learning approach based on
end-to-end Evidential-Efficient-Net (EEN) to extract radiomics features from
brain MRI and predict MGMT expression.Methods
The input data to our
deep learning model includes four MRI modalities, namely, T1, T2, FLAIR, and
T1c (T1 contract enhanced). We extracted 582 patient cases from BraTS2021
database2. These cases were selected
because they had the four MRI scans and known MGMT groundtruth. We randomly
separated the cases into a training set of 466 patients and a test set of 116
patients. All the MRIs were resized to 256 by 256 pixels in axial scans. For
some scans that were generated in the coronal and sagittal directions, we
transformed the scans to the axial direction.
The core component of our
method is the EfficientNetV23, which, in our method, was scaled down
to a tiny net that we named as EffNetV2-T. The EffNetV2-T preserved the MBConv
and Fused-MBConv block in the original EfficientNet in the architecture
searching space. We adjusted the channels and the SE lay inside the blocks to
accommodate the four MRI modalities. The original EfficientNetV2-S proves too
deep for our task, it would cause seriously overfitting and reach a low
bottleneck. To address these problem, besides scale down the network, we
introduced dropout layers and adjust regularization as well.
To achieve high performance,
we incorporated the idea of evidential deep learning (EDL) 4 into
our model. EDL is a novel method for training non-Bayesian neuron networks to
estimate a continuous target as well as its associated evidence to learn both
aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. We employed an evidential layer as the
last layer of our model. The evidential layer transfers
the image features to a Normal Inverse-Gamma (NIG) distribution:
$$p(\mu,\sigma^2|\gamma,\nu,\alpha,\beta)=\frac{\beta^\alpha\
\sqrt v}{\mathrm{\Gamma}(\alpha)\ \sqrt{2\pi\sigma^2}} (\frac{ 1}{\sigma^2\
})^{\alpha+1}\ \exp \left\{- \frac
{2\beta+\nu(\gamma-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2\ } \right\}$$
With an evidential
loss function: $$$L_i\ (w)=L_i^{NLL}\ (w)+\lambda L_i^R\ (w)$$$, in which
negative log likelihood(NLL) is defined for sample as $$$L_i^{NLL} = -log
[p(y_i|m)]$$$ and the evidence
regularizer that scaled by a regularization coefficient , $$$L_i^R(w)= |y_i-\gamma |·(2\nu + \alpha)$$$.
Our model formulates learning
as an evidence acquisition process, in which, every training example adds
information to maximizing the model fit and minimizing evidence on errors. To balance
the uncertainty inflation and the accuracy, we use maximum rate and ε to constraint the fluctuation of λ. we use Adam optimizer, and set the original learning
rate as 0.01. Our model reaches the best score within 50 epoch’s training, and
shows little signs of overfitting in five-cross validation.
In other words, our model used
the modified EffNetV2-T for feature extraction and evidential regression for
classifying the status of MGMT. We name the final model as Evidential-EffNet (Figure
2). Results
We used the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) to measure the
performance of the proposed model. Our results on the test set showed that the
model obtained an accuracy of 84.4% on average and an AUC of 0.809, indicating
its good performance. We also compared our model to others, which shows that our model has the best performance. (Figure 3 and Table 1)Discussion and Conclusions
We presented a novel
model that integrates EfficientNetV2 and EDL to predict MGMT expression using
brain MRI. We compared our model to the EffNetV2-T with Binary Cross Entropy as
the loss function and found that our model can train faster and obtain better
results. We also compared our model to an EffNet-like convolutional neural
network without network architecture searching. The result showed that our
model can train faster and obtain better result. Our model also compared
favorably with EffNet-B0-4, which uses only MBConv blocks as our model has a
faster training speed and higsher performance. Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Levner, Ilya, et al. "Predicting MGMT methylation status of glioblastomas from MRI texture." International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.
2. Baid, Ujjwal, et al. "The rsna-asnr-miccai brats 2021 benchmark on brain tumor segmentation and radiogenomic classification." arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.02314 (2021).
3. Tan, Mingxing, and Quoc V. Le. "Efficientnetv2: Smaller models and faster training." arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.00298 (2021).
4. Amini, Alexander, et al. "Deep evidential regression." Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020).