The goals of this review paper on deep learning (DL) in medical imaging and radiation therapy are to (a) summarize what has been achieved to date; (b) identify common and unique challenges, and strategies that researchers have taken to address these challenges; and (c) identify some of the promising avenues for the future both in terms of applications as well as technical innovations. We introduce the general principles of DL and convolutional neural networks, survey five major areas of application of DL in medical imaging and radiation therapy, identify common themes, discuss methods for dataset expansion, and conclude by summarizing lessons learned, remaining challenges, and future directions.

Deep learning is the state-of-the-art machine learning approach. The success of deep learning in many pattern recognition applications have brought excitement and high expectations that deep learning, or artificial intelligence (AI), can bring revolutionary changes in health care. Early studies of deep learning applied to lesion detection or classification have reported superior performance compared to those by conventional techniques or even better than radiologists in some tasks. The potential of applying deep-learning-based medical image analysis to computeraided diagnosis (CAD), thus providing decision support to clinicians and improving the accuracy and efficiency of various diagnostic and treatment processes, has spurred new research and development efforts in CAD. Despite the optimism in this new era of machine learning, the development and implementation of CAD or AI tools in clinical practice face many challenges. In this chapter, we will discuss some of these issues and efforts needed to develop robust deeplearning-based CAD tools and integrate these tools into the clinical workflow, thereby advancing towards the goal of providing reliable intelligent aids for patient care.

Grand challenges stimulate advances within the medical imaging research community; within a competitive yet friendly environment, they allow for a direct comparison of algorithms through a well-defined, centralized infrastructure. The tasks of the two-part PROSTATEx Challenges (the PROSTATEx Challenge and the PROSTATEx-2 Challenge) are (1) the computerized classification of clinically significant prostate lesions and (2) the computerized determination of Gleason Grade Group in prostate cancer, both based on multiparametric magnetic resonance images. The challenges incorporate well-vetted cases for training and testing, a centralized performance assessment process to evaluate results, and an established infrastructure for case dissemination, communication, and result submission. In the PROSTATEx Challenge, 32 groups apply their computerized methods (71 methods total) to 208 prostate lesions in the test set. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for these methods in the task of differentiating between lesions that are and are not clinically significant ranged from 0.45 to 0.87; statistically significant differences in performance among the top-performing methods, however, are not observed. In the PROSTATEx-2 Challenge, 21 groups apply their computerized methods (43 methods total) to 70 prostate lesions in the test set. When compared with the reference standard, the quadratic-weighted kappa values for these methods in the task of assigning a five-point Gleason Grade Group to each lesion range from −0.24 to 0.27; superiority to random guessing can be established for only two methods. When approached with a sense of commitment and scientific rigor, challenges foster interest in the designated task and encourage innovation in the field.

An automated image analysis tool is being developed for the estimation of mammographic breast density. This tool may be useful for risk estimation or for monitoring breast density change in prevention or intervention programs. In this preliminary study, a data set of 4-view mammograms from 65 patients was used to evaluate our approach. Breast density analysis was performed on the digitized mammograms in three stages. First, the breast region was segmented from the surrounding background by an automated breast boundary-tracking algorithm. Second, an adaptive dynamic range compression technique was applied to the breast image to reduce the range of the gray level distribution in the low frequency background and to enhance the differences in the characteristic features of the gray level histogram for breasts of different densities. Third, rule-based classification was used to classify the breast images into four classes according to the characteristic features of their gray level histogram. For each image, a gray level threshold was automatically determined to segment the dense tissue from the breast region. The area of segmented dense tissue as a percentage of the breast area was then estimated. To evaluate the performance of the algorithm, the computer segmentation results were compared to manual segmentation with interactive thresholding by five radiologists. A "true" percent dense area for each mammogram was obtained by averaging the manually segmented areas of the radiologists. We found that the histograms of 6% (8 CC and 8 MLO views) of the breast regions were misclassified by the computer, resulting in poor segmentation of the dense region. For the images with correct classification, the correlation between the computer-estimated percent dense area and the "truth" was 0.94 and 0.91, respectively, for CC and MLO views, with a mean bias of less than 2%. The mean biases of the five radiologists' visual estimates for the same images ranged from 0.1% to 11%. The results demonstrate the feasibility of estimating mammographic breast density using computer vision techniques and its potential to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of breast density estimation in comparison with the subjective visual assessment by radiologists.

Transfer learning in deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) is an important step in its application to medical imaging tasks. We propose a multi-task transfer learning DCNN with the aims of translating the ‘knowledge’ learned from non-medical images to medical diagnostic tasks through supervised training and increasing the generalization capabilities of DCNNs by simultaneously learning auxiliary tasks. We studied this approach in an important application: classification of malignant and benign breast masses. With IRB approval, digitized screen-film mammograms (SFMs) and digital mammograms (DMs) were collected from our patient files and additional SFMs were obtained from the Digital Database for Screening Mammography. The data set consisted of 2,242 views with 2,454 masses (1,057 malignant, 1,397 benign). In single-task transfer learning, the DCNN was trained and tested on SFMs. In multi-task transfer learning, SFMs and DMs were used to train the DCNN, which was then tested on SFMs. N-fold cross-validation with the training set was used for training and parameter optimization. On the independent test set, the multitask transfer learning DCNN was found to have significantly (p=0.007) higher performance compared to the single-task transfer learning DCNN. This study demonstrates that multitask transfer learning may be an effective approach for training DCNN in medical imaging applications when training samples from a single modality are limited.