Literature DB >> 18293583

Characterization of mammographic masses based on level set segmentation with new image features and patient information.

Jiazheng Shi1, Berkman Sahiner, Heang-Ping Chan, Jun Ge, Lubomir Hadjiiski, Mark A Helvie, Alexis Nees, Yi-Ta Wu, Jun Wei, Chuan Zhou, Yiheng Zhang, Jing Cui.   

Abstract

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for characterization of mammographic masses as malignant or benign has the potential to assist radiologists in reducing the biopsy rate without increasing false negatives. The purpose of this study was to develop an automated method for mammographic mass segmentation and explore new image based features in combination with patient information in order to improve the performance of mass characterization. The authors' previous CAD system, which used the active contour segmentation, and morphological, textural, and spiculation features, has achieved promising results in mass characterization. The new CAD system is based on the level set method and includes two new types of image features related to the presence of microcalcifications with the mass and abruptness of the mass margin, and patient age. A linear discriminant analysis (LDA) classifier with stepwise feature selection was used to merge the extracted features into a classification score. The classification accuracy was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The authors' primary data set consisted of 427 biopsy-proven masses (200 malignant and 227 benign) in 909 regions of interest (ROIs) (451 malignant and 458 benign) from multiple mammographic views. Leave-one-case-out resampling was used for training and testing. The new CAD system based on the level set segmentation and the new mammographic feature space achieved a view-based Az value of 0.83 +/- 0.01. The improvement compared to the previous CAD system was statistically significant (p = 0.02). When patient age was included in the new CAD system, view-based and case-based Az values were 0.85 +/- 0.01 and 0.87 +/- 0.02, respectively. The study also demonstrated the consistency of the newly developed CAD system by evaluating the statistics of the weights of the LDA classifiers in leave-one-case-out classification. Finally, an independent test on the publicly available digital database for screening mammography with 132 benign and 197 malignant ROIs containing masses achieved a view-based Az value of 0.84 +/- 0.02.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18293583      PMCID: PMC2728555          DOI: 10.1118/1.2820630

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  37 in total

1.  Feature selection and classifier performance in computer-aided diagnosis: the effect of finite sample size.

Authors:  B Sahiner; H P Chan; N Petrick; R F Wagner; L Hadjiiski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Computer-aided characterization of mammographic masses: accuracy of mass segmentation and its effects on characterization.

Authors:  B Sahiner; N Petrick; H P Chan; L M Hadjiiski; C Paramagul; M A Helvie; M N Gurcan
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 10.048

3.  Shape recovery algorithms using level sets in 2-D/3-D medical imagery: a state-of-the-art review.

Authors:  Jasjit S Suri; Kecheng Liu; Sameer Singh; Swamy N Laxminarayan; Xiaolan Zeng; Laura Reden
Journal:  IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed       Date:  2002-03

4.  Optimized approach to decision fusion of heterogeneous data for breast cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Jonathan L Jesneck; Loren W Nolte; Jay A Baker; Carey E Floyd; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 5.  What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments.

Authors:  T V Perneger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-04-18

6.  Image feature selection by a genetic algorithm: application to classification of mass and normal breast tissue.

Authors:  B Sahiner; H P Chan; D Wei; N Petrick; M A Helvie; D D Adler; M M Goodsitt
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Nonpalpable breast lesions: accuracy of prebiopsy mammographic diagnosis.

Authors:  G Hermann; C Janus; I S Schwartz; B Krivisky; S Bier; J G Rabinowitz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Computer-aided diagnosis of mammographic microcalcification clusters.

Authors:  Maria Kallergi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Classifying mammographic lesions using computerized image analysis.

Authors:  J Kilday; F Palmieri; M D Fox
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography.

Authors:  R E Bird; T W Wallace; B C Yankaskas
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  25 in total

1.  Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents.

Authors:  Swatee Singh; Jeff Maxwell; Jay A Baker; Jennifer L Nicholas; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Multilevel learning-based segmentation of ill-defined and spiculated masses in mammograms.

Authors:  Yimo Tao; Shih-Chung B Lo; Matthew T Freedman; Erini Makariou; Jianhua Xuan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  New statistical learning theory paradigms adapted to breast cancer diagnosis/classification using image and non-image clinical data.

Authors:  Walker H Land; John J Heine; Tom Raway; Alda Mizaku; Nataliya Kovalchuk; Jack Y Yang; Mary Qu Yang
Journal:  Int J Funct Inform Personal Med       Date:  2008-01

Review 4.  Anniversary paper: History and status of CAD and quantitative image analysis: the role of Medical Physics and AAPM.

Authors:  Maryellen L Giger; Heang-Ping Chan; John Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Reduction of false-positive recalls using a computerized mammographic image feature analysis scheme.

Authors:  Maxine Tan; Jiantao Pu; Bin Zheng
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Mammogram segmentation using maximal cell strength updation in cellular automata.

Authors:  J Anitha; J Dinesh Peter
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-04-05       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 7.  Overview of deep learning in medical imaging.

Authors:  Kenji Suzuki
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2017-07-08

Review 8.  Needs assessment for next generation computer-aided mammography reference image databases and evaluation studies.

Authors:  Alexander Horsch; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Matthias Elter
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 2.924

9.  Treatment response assessment of breast masses on dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance scans using fuzzy c-means clustering and level set segmentation.

Authors:  Jiazheng Shi; Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Chintana Paramagul; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Mark Helvie; Thomas Chenevert
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Multi-modality CADx: ROC study of the effect on radiologists' accuracy in characterizing breast masses on mammograms and 3D ultrasound images.

Authors:  Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Chintana Paramagul; Janet E Bailey; Alexis V Nees; Caroline E Blane; Dorit D Adler; Stephanie K Patterson; Katherine A Klein; Renee W Pinsky; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-04-17       Impact factor: 3.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.