Computer aided diagnosis for mammogram images have seen positive results through the usage of deep learning architectures. However, limited sample sizes for the target datasets might prevent the usage of a deep learning model under real world scenarios. The usage of unlabeled data to improve the accuracy of the model can be an approach to tackle the lack of target data. Moreover, important model attributes for the medical domain as model uncertainty might be improved through the usage of unlabeled data. Therefore, in this work we explore the impact of using unlabeled data through the implementation of a recent approach known as MixMatch, for mammogram images. We evaluate the improvement on accuracy and uncertainty of the model using popular and simple approaches to estimate uncertainty. For this aim, we propose the usage of the uncertainty balanced accuracy metric.

The implementation of deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis systems for the classification of mammogram images can help in improving the accuracy, reliability, and cost of diagnosing patients. However, training a deep learning model requires a considerable amount of labelled images, which can be expensive to obtain as time and effort from clinical practitioners are required. To address this, a number of publicly available datasets have been built with data from different hospitals and clinics, which can be used to pre-train the model. However, using models trained on these datasets for later transfer learning and model fine-tuning with images sampled from a different hospital or clinic might result in lower performance. This is due to the distribution mismatch of the datasets, which include different patient populations and image acquisition protocols. In this work, a real-world scenario is evaluated where a novel target dataset sampled from a private Costa Rican clinic is used, with few labels and heavily imbalanced data. The use of two popular and publicly available datasets (INbreast and CBIS-DDSM) as source data, to train and test the models on the novel target dataset, is evaluated. A common approach to further improve the model's performance under such small labelled target dataset setting is data augmentation. However, often cheaper unlabelled data is available from the target clinic. Therefore, semi-supervised deep learning, which leverages both labelled and unlabelled data, can be used in such conditions. In this work, we evaluate the semi-supervised deep learning approach known as MixMatch, to take advantage of unlabelled data from the target dataset, for whole mammogram image classification. We compare the usage of semi-supervised learning on its own, and combined with transfer learning (from a source mammogram dataset) with data augmentation, as also against regular supervised learning with transfer learning and data augmentation from source datasets. It is shown that the use of a semi-supervised deep learning combined with transfer learning and data augmentation can provide a meaningful advantage when using scarce labelled observations. Also, we found a strong influence of the source dataset, which suggests a more data-centric approach needed to tackle the challenge of scarcely labelled data. We used several different metrics to assess the performance gain of using semi-supervised learning, when dealing with very imbalanced test datasets (such as the G-mean and the F2-score), as mammogram datasets are often very imbalanced.

The implementation of deep learning based computer aided diagnosis systems for the classification of mammogram images can help in improving the accuracy, reliability, and cost of diagnosing patients. However, training a deep learning model requires a considerable amount of labeled images, which can be expensive to obtain as time and effort from clinical practitioners is required. A number of publicly available datasets have been built with data from different hospitals and clinics. However, using models trained on these datasets for later work on images sampled from a different hospital or clinic might result in lower performance. This is due to the distribution mismatch of