Table 3.
The comparison between the proposed hybrid CNN-transformer DL model and other benchmark DL models for HER2-positive and HER2-negative classification in the external test set.
| Method | AUC | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | F1 score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ViT | 0.81 (0.67, 0.94) | 0.82 (0.70, 0.93) | 0.86 (0.70, 1.00) | 0.77 (0.59, 0.95) | 0.83 (0.67, 0.92) |
| DenseNet | 0.82 (0.68, 0.94) | 0.66 (0.52, 0.80) | 0.77 (0.60, 0.95) | 0.55 (0.33, 0.75) | 0.69 (0.51, 0.84) |
| ResNet | 0.84 (0.68, 0.96) | 0.68 (0.55, 0.82) | 0.41 (0.21, 0.61) | 0.95 (0.85, 1.00) | 0.56 (0.33, 0.74) |
| ConvNeXt | 0.87 (0.73, 0.97) | 0.80 (0.68, 0.91) | 0.77 (0.59, 0.95) | 0.82 (0.65, 0.96) | 0.79 (0.63, 0.91) |
| Our Model | 0.91 (0.79, 0.99) | 0.84 (0.73, 0.93) | 0.91 (0.79, 1.00) | 0.77 (0.58, 0.95) | 0.85 (0.73, 0.95) |
The best results are shown in bold. The values in parentheses are confidence intervals. AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.