Injecting and removing suspicious features in breast imaging with CycleGAN: A pilot study of automated adversarial attacks using neural networks on small images

•GANs can learn what makes a mammographic image look suspicious and modify the images accordingly.•GANs’ ability to modify medical images in a targeted way can be of great use in certain teaching or research settings.•With increasing memory and computing availability, GANs could potentially be used...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of radiology 2019-11, Vol.120, p.108649-108649, Article 108649
Hauptverfasser: Becker, Anton S., Jendele, Lukas, Skopek, Ondrej, Berger, Nicole, Ghafoor, Soleen, Marcon, Magda, Konukoglu, Ender
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•GANs can learn what makes a mammographic image look suspicious and modify the images accordingly.•GANs’ ability to modify medical images in a targeted way can be of great use in certain teaching or research settings.•With increasing memory and computing availability, GANs could potentially be used as a cyber-weapon in the near future. To train a CycleGAN on downscaled versions of mammographic data to artificially inject or remove suspicious features, and to determine whether these AI-mediated attacks can be detected by radiologists. From two publicly available datasets, BCDR and INbreast, we selected 680 images with and without lesions as training data. An internal dataset (n = 302 cancers, n = 590 controls) served as test data. We ran two experiments (256 × 256 px and 512 × 408 px) and applied the trained model to the test data. Three radiologists read a set of images (modified and originals) and rated the presence of suspicious lesions on a scale from 1 to 5 and the likelihood of the image being manipulated. The readout was evaluated by multiple reader multiple case receiver operating characteristics (MRMC-ROC) analysis using the area under the curve (AUC). At the lower resolution, the overall performance was not affected by the CycleGAN modifications (AUC 0.70 vs. 0.76, p = 0.67). However, one radiologist exhibited lower detection of cancer (0.85 vs 0.63, p = 0.06). The radiologists could not discriminate between original and modified images (0.55, p = 0.45). At the higher resolution, all radiologists showed significantly lower detection rate of cancer in the modified images (0.80 vs. 0.37, p 
ISSN:0720-048X
1872-7727
DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108649