4.6 Article

Deep Learning for Prediction of AMD Progression: A Pilot Study

期刊

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.18-25325

关键词

age-related macular degeneration; optical coherence tomography; image analysis; deep learning; choroidal neovascularization

资金

  1. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital
  2. UCL Institute of Ophthalmology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. To develop and assess a method for predicting the likelihood of converting from early/intermediate to advanced wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging and methods of deep learning. METHODS. Seventy-one eyes of 71 patients with confirmed early/intermediate AMD with contralateral wet AMD were imaged with OCT three times over 2 years (baseline, year 1, year 2). These eyes were divided into two groups: eyes that had not converted to wet AMD (n = 40) at year 2 and those that had (n = 31). Two deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) were evaluated using 5-fold cross validation on the OCT data at baseline to attempt to predict which eyes would convert to advanced AMD at year 2: (1) VGG16, a popular CNN for image recognition was fine-tuned, and (2) a novel, simplified CNN architecture was trained from scratch. Preprocessing was added in the form of a segmentation-based normalization to reduce variance in the data and improve performance. RESULTS. Our new architecture, AMDnet, with preprocessing, achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.89 at the B-scan level and 0.91 for volumes. Results for VGG16, an established CNN architecture, with preprocessing were 0.82 for B-scans/0.87 for volumes versus 0.66 for B-scans/0.69 for volumes without preprocessing. CONCLUSIONS. A CNN with layer segmentation-based preprocessing shows strong predictive power for the progression of early/intermediate AMD to advanced AMD. Use of the preprocessing was shown to improve performance regardless of the network architecture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据