Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Predicting Progression of Age-related Macular Degeneration from Fundus Images using Deep Learning (1904.05478v1)

Published 10 Apr 2019 in cs.CV

Abstract: Background: Patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) can avoid vision loss via certain therapy. However, methods to predict the progression to neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD) are lacking. Purpose: To develop and validate a deep learning (DL) algorithm to predict 1-year progression of eyes with no, early, or intermediate AMD to nvAMD, using color fundus photographs (CFP). Design: Development and validation of a DL algorithm. Methods: We trained a DL algorithm to predict 1-year progression to nvAMD, and used 10-fold cross-validation to evaluate this approach on two groups of eyes in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS): none/early/intermediate AMD, and intermediate AMD (iAMD) only. We compared the DL algorithm to the manually graded 4-category and 9-step scales in the AREDS dataset. Main outcome measures: Performance of the DL algorithm was evaluated using the sensitivity at 80% specificity for progression to nvAMD. Results: The DL algorithm's sensitivity for predicting progression to nvAMD from none/early/iAMD (78+/-6%) was higher than manual grades from the 9-step scale (67+/-8%) or the 4-category scale (48+/-3%). For predicting progression specifically from iAMD, the DL algorithm's sensitivity (57+/-6%) was also higher compared to the 9-step grades (36+/-8%) and the 4-category grades (20+/-0%). Conclusions: Our DL algorithm performed better in predicting progression to nvAMD than manual grades. Future investigations are required to test the application of this DL algorithm in a real-world clinical setting.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (8)
  1. Boris Babenko (9 papers)
  2. Siva Balasubramanian (4 papers)
  3. Katy E. Blumer (1 paper)
  4. Lily Peng (17 papers)
  5. Naama Hammel (9 papers)
  6. Greg S. Corrado (37 papers)
  7. Dale R. Webster (20 papers)
  8. Avinash V. Varadarajan (6 papers)
Citations (10)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.