PURPOSE: We propose a method for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval-cancer cases based on the expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in mammograms. METHODS: The expected orientation of the breast tissue at each pixel was derived by using automatically detected landmarks including the breast boundary, the nipple, and the pectoral muscle (in mediolateral-oblique views). We hypothesize that the presence of architectural distortion changes the normal expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in a mammographic image. The angular deviation of the oriented structures in a given mammogram as compared to the expected orientation was analyzed to detect potential sites of architectural distortion using a measure of divergence of oriented patterns. Each potential site of architectural distortion was then characterized using measures of spicularity and angular dispersion specifically designed to represent spiculating patterns. The novel features for the characterization of spiculating patterns include an index of divergence of spicules computed from the intensity image and Gabor magnitude response using the Gabor angle response; radially weighted difference and angle-weighted difference (AWD) measures of the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response; and AWD in the entropy of spicules computed from the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response. RESULTS: Using the newly proposed features with a database of 106 prior mammograms of 56 interval-cancer cases and 52 mammograms of 13 normal cases, through feature selection and pattern classification with an artificial neural network, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 was obtained. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated a sensitivity of 0.80 at 5.3 false positives (FPs) per patient. Combining the features proposed in the present paper with others described in our previous works led to significant improvement with a sensitivity of 0.80 at 3.7 FPs per patient. CONCLUSION: The proposed methods can detect architectural distortion in prior mammograms taken 15 months (on the average) before clinical diagnosis of breast cancer, but the FP rate needs to be reduced.
PURPOSE: We propose a method for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval-cancer cases based on the expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in mammograms. METHODS: The expected orientation of the breast tissue at each pixel was derived by using automatically detected landmarks including the breast boundary, the nipple, and the pectoral muscle (in mediolateral-oblique views). We hypothesize that the presence of architectural distortion changes the normal expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in a mammographic image. The angular deviation of the oriented structures in a given mammogram as compared to the expected orientation was analyzed to detect potential sites of architectural distortion using a measure of divergence of oriented patterns. Each potential site of architectural distortion was then characterized using measures of spicularity and angular dispersion specifically designed to represent spiculating patterns. The novel features for the characterization of spiculating patterns include an index of divergence of spicules computed from the intensity image and Gabor magnitude response using the Gabor angle response; radially weighted difference and angle-weighted difference (AWD) measures of the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response; and AWD in the entropy of spicules computed from the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response. RESULTS: Using the newly proposed features with a database of 106 prior mammograms of 56 interval-cancer cases and 52 mammograms of 13 normal cases, through feature selection and pattern classification with an artificial neural network, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 was obtained. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated a sensitivity of 0.80 at 5.3 false positives (FPs) per patient. Combining the features proposed in the present paper with others described in our previous works led to significant improvement with a sensitivity of 0.80 at 3.7 FPs per patient. CONCLUSION: The proposed methods can detect architectural distortion in prior mammograms taken 15 months (on the average) before clinical diagnosis of breast cancer, but the FP rate needs to be reduced.
Authors: S K Kinoshita; P M Azevedo-Marques; R R Pereira; J A H Rodrigues; R M Rangayyan Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2007-04-11 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: M J M Broeders; N C Onland-Moret; H J T M Rijken; J H C L Hendriks; A L M Verbeek; R Holland Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Nathaniel M Braman; Maryam Etesami; Prateek Prasanna; Christina Dubchuk; Hannah Gilmore; Pallavi Tiwari; Donna Plecha; Anant Madabhushi Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 6.466