Raghav Mehta

Deep learning (DL) models have provided the state-of-the-art performance in a wide variety of medical imaging benchmarking challenges, including the Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) challenges. However, the task of focal pathology multi-compartment segmentation (e.g., tumor and lesion sub-regions) is particularly challenging, and potential errors hinder the translation of DL models into clinical workflows. Quantifying the reliability of DL model predictions in the form of uncertainties, could enable clinical review of the most uncertain regions, thereby building trust and paving the way towards clinical translation. Recently, a number of uncertainty estimation methods have been introduced for DL medical image segmentation tasks. Developing scores to evaluate and compare the performance of uncertainty measures will assist the end-user in making more informed decisions. In this study, we explore and evaluate a score developed during the BraTS 2019-2020 task on uncertainty quantification (QU-BraTS), and designed to assess and rank uncertainty estimates for brain tumor multi-compartment segmentation. This score (1) rewards uncertainty estimates that produce high confidence in correct assertions, and those that assign low confidence levels at incorrect assertions, and (2) penalizes uncertainty measures that lead to a higher percentages of under-confident correct assertions. We further benchmark the segmentation uncertainties generated by 14 independent participating teams of QU-BraTS 2020, all of which also participated in the main BraTS segmentation task. Overall, our findings confirm the importance and complementary value that uncertainty estimates provide to segmentation algorithms, and hence highlight the need for uncertainty quantification in medical image analyses.

Although deep networks have been shown to perform very well on a variety of medical imaging tasks, inference in the presence of pathology presents several challenges to common models. These challenges impede the integration of deep learning models into real clinical workflows, where the customary process of cascading deterministic outputs from a sequence of image-based inference steps (e.g. registration, segmentation) generally leads to an accumulation of errors that impacts the accuracy of downstream inference tasks. In this paper, we propose that by embedding uncertainty estimates across cascaded inference tasks, performance on the downstream inference tasks should be improved. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach in three different clinical contexts: (i) We demonstrate that by propagating T2 weighted lesion segmentation results and their associated uncertainties, subsequent T2 lesion detection performance is improved when evaluated on a proprietary large-scale, multi-site, clinical trial dataset acquired from patients with Multiple Sclerosis. (ii) We show an improvement in brain tumour segmentation performance when the uncertainty map associated with a synthesised missing MR volume is provided as an additional input to a follow-up brain tumour segmentation network, when evaluated on the publicly available BraTS-2018 dataset. (iii) We show that by propagating uncertainties from a voxel-level hippocampus segmentation task, the subsequent regression of the Alzheimer’s disease clinical score is improved.

A brain MRI atlas plays an important role in many neuroimage analysis tasks as it provides an atlas with a standard co-ordinate system which is needed for spatial normalization of a brain MRI. Ideally, this atlas should be as near to the average brain of the population being studied as possible. Hence, correction for age and gender is typically done by selecting age- and gender-appropriate atlases. The MNI152 \citeMNI152 is used as a standard atlas in many studies. MNI152 is constructed using T1 brain MRI scan of 152 Caucasian subjects. Similarly, the LPBA40 atlas derived from 40 ethnically diverse subjects is popular in segmentation as it provides structure probabilty maps \citelonii for 56 cortical structures of 40 brain volumes. However, there is emerging evidence for morphological difference across populations especially in terms of global brain features like height, width and length which suggest that population-specific atlases may also be needed for accurate analysis. We report on the construction of a brain atlas of subjects from India. In the first part of this paper, we construct and validate the Indian brain MRI atlas of young Indian population and the corresponding structure probability maps. Next we also report our findings based on comparison of the Indian brain atlas with other population-specific atlases. The findings confirm that there is significant morphological difference between Indian, Chinese and Caucasian populations.

Trustworthy deployment of deep learning medical imaging models into real-world clinical practice requires that they be calibrated. However, models that are well calibrated overall can still be poorly calibrated for a sub-population, potentially resulting in a clinician unwittingly making poor decisions for this group based on the recommendations of the model. Although methods have been shown to successfully mitigate biases across subgroups in terms of model accuracy, this work focuses on the open problem of mitigating calibration biases in the context of medical image analysis. Our method does not require subgroup attributes during training, permitting the flexibility to mitigate biases for different choices of sensitive attributes without re-training. To this end, we propose a novel two-stage method: Cluster-Focal to first identify poorly calibrated samples, cluster them into groups, and then introduce group-wise focal loss to improve calibration bias. We evaluate our method on skin lesion classification with the public HAM10000 dataset, and on predicting future lesional activity for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. In addition to considering traditional sensitive attributes (e.g. age, sex) with demographic subgroups, we also consider biases among groups with different image-derived attributes, such as lesion load, which are required in medical image analysis. Our results demonstrate that our method effectively controls calibration error in the worst-performing subgroups while preserving prediction performance, and outperforming recent baselines.

Image-based precision medicine aims to personalize treatment decisions based on an individual’s unique imaging features so as to improve their clinical outcome. Machine learning frameworks that integrate uncertainty estimation as part of their treatment recommendations would be safer and more reliable. However, little work has been done in adapting uncertainty estimation techniques and validation metrics for precision medicine. In this paper, we use Bayesian deep learning for estimating the posterior distribution over factual and counterfactual outcomes on several treatments. This allows for estimating the uncertainty for each treatment option and for the individual treatment effects (ITE) between any two treatments. We train and evaluate this model to predict future new and enlarging T2 lesion counts on a large, multi-center dataset of MR brain images of patients with multiple sclerosis, exposed to several treatments during randomized controlled trials. We evaluate the correlation of the uncertainty estimate with the factual error, and, given the lack of ground truth counterfactual outcomes, demonstrate how uncertainty for the ITE prediction relates to bounds on the ITE error. Lastly, we demonstrate how knowledge of uncertainty could modify clinical decision-making to improve individual patient and clinical trial outcomes.

Although deep learning (DL) models have shown great success in many medical image analysis tasks, deployment of the resulting models into real clinical contexts requires: (1) that they exhibit robustness and fairness across different sub-populations, and (2) that the confidence in DL model predictions be accurately expressed in the form of uncertainties. Unfortunately, recent studies have indeed shown significant biases in DL models across demographic subgroups (e.g., race, sex, age) in the context of medical image analysis, indicating a lack of fairness in the models. Although several methods have been proposed in the ML literature to mitigate a lack of fairness in DL models, they focus entirely on the absolute performance between groups without considering their effect on uncertainty estimation. In this work, we present the first exploration of the effect of popular fairness models on overcoming biases across subgroups in medical image analysis in terms of bottom-line performance, and their effects on uncertainty quantification. We perform extensive experiments on three different clinically relevant tasks: (i) skin lesion classification, (ii) brain tumour segmentation, and (iii) Alzheimer’s disease clinical score regression. Our results indicate that popular ML methods, such as data-balancing and distributionally robust optimization, succeed in mitigating fairness issues in terms of the model performances for some of the tasks. However, this can come at the cost of poor uncertainty estimates associated with the model predictions. This tradeoff must be mitigated if fairness models are to be adopted in medical image analysis.