Literature DB >> 19409817

Prediction of malignant breast lesions from MRI features: a comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression techniques.

Christine E McLaren1, Wen-Pin Chen, Ke Nie, Min-Ying Su.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging is a clinical imaging modality for the detection and diagnosis of breast lesions. Analytic methods were compared for diagnostic feature selection and the performance of lesion classification to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions in patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 43 malignant and 28 benign histologically proved lesions. Eight morphologic parameters, 10 gray-level co-occurrence matrix texture features, and 14 Laws texture features were obtained using automated lesion segmentation and quantitative feature extraction. Artificial neural network (ANN) and logistic regression analysis were compared for the selection of the best predictors of malignant lesions among the normalized features.
RESULTS: Using ANN, the final four selected features were compactness, energy, homogeneity, and Law_LS, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.82 and accuracy of 0.76. The diagnostic performance of these four features computed on the basis of logistic regression yielded an AUC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.688-0.905), similar to that of ANN. The analysis also showed that the odds of a malignant lesion decreased by 48% (95% CI, 25%-92%) for every increase of 1 standard deviation in the Law_LS feature, adjusted for differences in compactness, energy, and homogeneity. Using logistic regression with z-score transformation, a model composed of compactness, normalized radial length entropy, and gray-level sum average was selected, and it had the highest overall accuracy, 0.75, among all models, with an AUC of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.660-0.880). When logistic modeling of transformations using the Box-Cox method was performed, the most parsimonious model with predictors compactness and Law_LS had an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.672-0.898).
CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of models selected by ANN and logistic regression was similar. The analytic methods were found to be roughly equivalent in terms of predictive ability when a small number of variables were chosen. The robust ANN methodology uses a sophisticated nonlinear model, while logistic regression analysis provides insightful information to enhance the interpretation of the model features.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19409817      PMCID: PMC2832583          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.01.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  27 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of artificial neural networks with other statistical approaches: results from medical data sets.

Authors:  D J Sargent
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2001-04-15       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  The role of contrast-enhanced MR mammography for determining candidates for breast conservation surgery.

Authors:  Yu Zhang; Hiroshi Fukatsu; Shinji Naganawa; Hiroko Satake; Yasuyuki Sato; Mikinao Ohiwa; Tokiko Endo; Shu Ichihara; Takeo Ishigaki
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.239

3.  External validity of predictive models: a comparison of logistic regression, classification trees, and neural networks.

Authors:  Norma Terrin; Christopher H Schmid; John L Griffith; Ralph B D'Agostino; Harry P Selker
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Computerized interpretation of breast MRI: investigation of enhancement-variance dynamics.

Authors:  Weijie Chen; Maryellen L Giger; Li Lan; Ulrich Bick
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Stepwise logistic regression analysis of tumor contour features for breast ultrasound diagnosis.

Authors:  Y H Chou; C M Tiu; G S Hung; S C Wu; T Y Chang; H K Chiang
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.998

6.  Predicting hospital mortality for patients in the intensive care unit: a comparison of artificial neural networks with logistic regression models.

Authors:  G Clermont; D C Angus; S M DiRusso; M Griffin; W T Linde-Zwirble
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  Artificial neural networks applied to survival prediction in breast cancer.

Authors:  M Lundin; J Lundin; H B Burke; S Toikkanen; L Pylkkänen; H Joensuu
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.935

8.  Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or PET: boon or bunk?

Authors:  A Rieber; H Schirrmeister; A Gabelmann; K Nuessle; S Reske; R Kreienberg; H J Brambs; T Kuehn
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment.

Authors:  K Schelfout; M Van Goethem; E Kersschot; C Colpaert; A M Schelfhout; P Leyman; I Verslegers; I Biltjes; J Van Den Haute; J P Gillardin; W Tjalma; J C Van Der Auwera; P Buytaert; A De Schepper
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.424

10.  Quantitative analysis of lesion morphology and texture features for diagnostic prediction in breast MRI.

Authors:  Ke Nie; Jeon-Hor Chen; Hon J Yu; Yong Chu; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.173

View more
  27 in total

1.  Textural kinetics: a novel dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI feature for breast lesion classification.

Authors:  Shannon C Agner; Salil Soman; Edward Libfeld; Margie McDonald; Kathleen Thomas; Sarah Englander; Mark A Rosen; Deanna Chin; John Nosher; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 2.  Standards affecting the consistency of gene expression arrays in clinical applications.

Authors:  Steven A Enkemann
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Radiomics: a new application from established techniques.

Authors:  Vishwa Parekh; Michael A Jacobs
Journal:  Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev       Date:  2016-03-31

Review 4.  NCTN Assessment on Current Applications of Radiomics in Oncology.

Authors:  Ke Nie; Hania Al-Hallaq; X Allen Li; Stanley H Benedict; Jason W Sohn; Jean M Moran; Yong Fan; Mi Huang; Michael V Knopp; Jeff M Michalski; James Monroe; Ceferino Obcemea; Christina I Tsien; Timothy Solberg; Jackie Wu; Ping Xia; Ying Xiao; Issam El Naqa
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Breast cancer molecular subtype classifier that incorporates MRI features.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Sutton; Brittany Z Dashevsky; Jung Hun Oh; Harini Veeraraghavan; Aditya P Apte; Sunitha B Thakur; Elizabeth A Morris; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Breast cancer subtype intertumor heterogeneity: MRI-based features predict results of a genomic assay.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Sutton; Jung Hun Oh; Brittany Z Dashevsky; Harini Veeraraghavan; Aditya P Apte; Sunitha B Thakur; Joseph O Deasy; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Computerized assessment of breast lesion malignancy using DCE-MRI robustness study on two independent clinical datasets from two manufacturers.

Authors:  Weijie Chen; Maryellen L Giger; Gillian M Newstead; Ulrich Bick; Sanaz A Jansen; Hui Li; Li Lan
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Support vector machine model for diagnosing pneumoconiosis based on wavelet texture features of digital chest radiographs.

Authors:  Biyun Zhu; Hui Chen; Budong Chen; Yan Xu; Kuan Zhang
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  MR imaging texture analysis of the corpus callosum and thalamus in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  M S de Oliveira; M L F Balthazar; A D'Abreu; C L Yasuda; B P Damasceno; F Cendes; G Castellano
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 10.  Machine learning in breast MRI.

Authors:  Beatriu Reig; Laura Heacock; Krzysztof J Geras; Linda Moy
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.