Literature DB >> 19544771

A new automated method for the segmentation and characterization of breast masses on ultrasound images.

Jing Cui1, Berkman Sahiner, Heang-Ping Chan, Alexis Nees, Chintana Paramagul, Lubomir M Hadjiiski, Chuan Zhou, Jiazheng Shi.   

Abstract

Segmentation is one of the first steps in most computer-aided diagnosis systems for characterization of masses as malignant or benign. In this study, the authors designed an automated method for segmentation of breast masses on ultrasound (US) images. The method automatically estimated an initial contour based on a manually identified point approximately at the mass center. A two-stage active contour method iteratively refined the initial contour and performed self-examination and correction on the segmentation result. To evaluate the method, the authors compared it with manual segmentation by two experienced radiologists (R1 and R2) on a data set of 488 US images from 250 biopsy-proven masses (100 malignant and 150 benign). Two area overlap ratios (AOR1 and AOR2) and an area error measure were used as performance measures to evaluate the segmentation accuracy. Values for AOR1, defined as the ratio of the intersection of the computer and the reference segmented areas to the reference segmented area, were 0.82 +/- 0.16 and 0.84 +/- 0.18, respectively, when manually segmented mass regions by R1 and R2 were used as the reference. Although this indicated a high agreement between the computer and manual segmentations, the two radiologists' manual segmentation results were significantly (p < 0.03) more consistent, with AOR1 = 0.84 +/- 0.16 and 0.91 +/- 0.12, respectively, when the segmented regions by R1 and R2 were used as the reference. To evaluate the segmentation method in terms of lesion classification accuracy, feature spaces were formed by extracting texture, width-to-height, and posterior shadowing features based on either automated computer segmentation or the radiologists' manual segmentation. A linear discriminant analysis classifier was designed using stepwise feature selection and two-fold cross validation to characterize the mass as malignant or benign. For features extracted from computer segmentation, the case-based test A(z) values ranged from 0.88 +/- 0.03 to 0.92 +/- 0.02, indicating a comparable performance to those extracted from manual segmentation by radiologists (A(z) value range: 0.87 +/- 0.03 to 0.90 +/- 0.03).

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19544771      PMCID: PMC2736705          DOI: 10.1118/1.3110069

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


  22 in total

1.  Computerized diagnosis of breast lesions on ultrasound.

Authors:  Karla Horsch; Maryellen L Giger; Luz A Venta; Carl J Vyborny
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Computerized characterization of breast masses on three-dimensional ultrasound volumes.

Authors:  Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Aditya Ramachandran; Chintana Paramagul; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Alexis Nees; Caroline Blane
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Improvement in radiologists' characterization of malignant and benign breast masses on serial mammograms with computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC study.

Authors:  Lubomir Hadjiiski; Heang-Ping Chan; Berkman Sahiner; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Caroline Blane; Chintana Paramagul; Nicholas Petrick; Janet Bailey; Katherine Klein; Michelle Foster; Stephanie Patterson; Dorit Adler; Alexis Nees; Joseph Shen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-08-18       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Computer-aided diagnosis of solid breast nodules: use of an artificial neural network based on multiple sonographic features.

Authors:  Segyeong Joo; Yoon Seok Yang; Woo Kyung Moon; Hee Chan Kim
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 10.048

5.  Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data.

Authors:  C E Metz; B A Herman; J H Shen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

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.  Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions.

Authors:  A T Stavros; D Thickman; C L Rapp; M A Dennis; S H Parker; G A Sisney
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Combining low-, high-level and empirical domain knowledge for automated segmentation of ultrasonic breast lesions.

Authors:  Anant Madabhushi; Dimitris N Metaxas
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 10.048

9.  Ultrasound as a complement to mammography and breast examination to characterize breast masses.

Authors:  Kenneth J W Taylor; Christopher Merritt; Catherine Piccoli; Robert Schmidt; Glenn Rouse; Bruno Fornage; Eva Rubin; Dianne Georgian-Smith; Fred Winsberg; Barry Goldberg; Ellen Mendelson
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.998

10.  Computer-based margin analysis of breast sonography for differentiating malignant and benign masses.

Authors:  Chandra M Sehgal; Theodore W Cary; Sarah A Kangas; Susan P Weinstein; Susan M Schultz; Peter H Arger; Emily F Conant
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.153

View more
  10 in total

1.  Classification of breast masses in ultrasound images using self-adaptive differential evolution extreme learning machine and rough set feature selection.

Authors:  Kadayanallur Mahadevan Prabusankarlal; Palanisamy Thirumoorthy; Radhakrishnan Manavalan
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-06-16

2.  A similarity study of content-based image retrieval system for breast cancer using decision tree.

Authors:  Hyun-Chong Cho; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark Helvie; Chintana Paramagul; Alexis V Nees
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Similarity evaluation in a content-based image retrieval (CBIR) CADx system for characterization of breast masses on ultrasound images.

Authors:  Hyun-Chong Cho; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark Helvie; Chintana Paramagul; Alexis V Nees
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Computer-aided diagnostic models in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Turgay Ayer; Mehmet Us Ayvaci; Ze Xiu Liu; Oguzhan Alagoz; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Imaging Med       Date:  2010-06-01

5.  Automated noninvasive classification of renal cancer on multiphase CT.

Authors:  Marius George Linguraru; Shijun Wang; Furhawn Shah; Rabindra Gautam; James Peterson; W Marston Linehan; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  The diagnostic performance of leak-plugging automated segmentation versus manual tracing of breast lesions on ultrasound images.

Authors:  Hui Xiong; Laith R Sultan; Theodore W Cary; Susan M Schultz; Ghizlane Bouzghar; Chandra M Sehgal
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2017-01-25

Review 7.  Quantification of heterogeneity as a biomarker in tumor imaging: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lejla Alic; Wiro J Niessen; Jifke F Veenland
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Interactive Outlining of Pancreatic Cancer Liver Metastases in Ultrasound Images.

Authors:  Jan Egger; Dieter Schmalstieg; Xiaojun Chen; Wolfram G Zoller; Alexander Hann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Towards clinical application of image mining: a systematic review on artificial intelligence and radiomics.

Authors:  Martina Sollini; Lidija Antunovic; Arturo Chiti; Margarita Kirienko
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Automated and real-time segmentation of suspicious breast masses using convolutional neural network.

Authors:  Viksit Kumar; Jeremy M Webb; Adriana Gregory; Max Denis; Duane D Meixner; Mahdi Bayat; Dana H Whaley; Mostafa Fatemi; Azra Alizad
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.