Literature DB >> 24694144

Multichannel response analysis on 2D projection views for detection of clustered microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis.

Jun Wei1, Heang-Ping Chan1, Lubomir M Hadjiiski1, Mark A Helvie1, Yao Lu1, Chuan Zhou1, Ravi Samala1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of a new two-dimensional (2D) multichannel response (MCR) analysis approach for the detection of clustered microcalcifications (MCs) in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT).
METHODS: With IRB approval and informed consent, a data set of two-view DBTs from 42 breasts containing biopsy-proven MC clusters was collected in this study. The authors developed a 2D approach for MC detection using projection view (PV) images rather than the reconstructed three-dimensional (3D) DBT volume. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) enhancement processing was first applied to each PV to enhance the potential MCs. The locations of MC candidates were then identified with iterative thresholding. The individual MCs were decomposed with Hermite-Gaussian (HG) and Laguerre-Gaussian (LG) basis functions and the channelized Hotelling model was trained to produce the MCRs for each MC on the 2D images. The MCRs from the PVs were fused in 3D by a coincidence counting method that backprojects the MC candidates on the PVs and traces the coincidence of their ray paths in 3D. The 3D MCR was used to differentiate the true MCs from false positives (FPs). Finally a dynamic clustering method was used to identify the potential MC clusters in the DBT volume based on the fact that true MCs of clinical significance appear in clusters. Using two-fold cross validation, the performance of the 3D MCR for classification of true and false MCs was estimated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the overall performance of the MCR approach for detection of clustered MCs was assessed by free response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) analysis.
RESULTS: When the HG basis function was used for MCR analysis, the detection of MC cluster achieved case-based test sensitivities of 80% and 90% at the average FP rates of 0.65 and 1.55 FPs per DBT volume, respectively. With LG basis function, the average FP rates were 0.62 and 1.57 per DBT volume at the same sensitivity levels. The difference in the two sets of basis functions for detection of MCs did not show statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS: The authors' experimental results indicate that the MCR approach is promising for the detection of MCs on PV images. The HG or LG basis functions are both effective in characterizing the signal response of MCs using the channelized Hotelling model. The coincidence counting method for fusion of the 2D MCR in 3D is an important step for FP reduction. Further study is underway to improve the MCR approach for microcalcification detection in DBT.
© 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24694144      PMCID: PMC3971829          DOI: 10.1118/1.4868694

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


  14 in total

1.  Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: a 3D approach.

Authors:  Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Mark A Helvie; Jun Wei; Chuan Zhou; Yao Lu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study.

Authors:  Matthew G Wallis; Elin Moa; Federica Zanca; Karin Leifland; Mats Danielsson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Selective-diffusion regularization for enhancement of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction.

Authors:  Yao Lu; Heang-Ping Chan; Jun Wei; Lubomir M Hadjiiski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Laminar and orientation-dependent characteristics of spatial nonlinearities: implications for the computational architecture of visual cortex.

Authors:  Jonathan D Victor; Ferenc Mechler; Ifije Ohiorhenuan; Anita M Schmid; Keith P Purpura
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging.

Authors:  L T Niklason; B T Christian; L E Niklason; D B Kopans; D E Castleberry; B H Opsahl-Ong; C E Landberg; P J Slanetz; A A Giardino; R Moore; D Albagli; M C DeJule; P F Fitzgerald; D F Fobare; B W Giambattista; R F Kwasnick; J Liu; S J Lubowski; G E Possin; J F Richotte; C Y Wei; R F Wirth
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Model observers for assessment of image quality.

Authors:  H H Barrett; J Yao; J P Rolland; K J Myers
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1993-11-01       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: A subjective side-by-side review.

Authors:  Christiane M Hakim; Denise M Chough; Marie A Ganott; Jules H Sumkin; Margarita L Zuley; David Gur
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison.

Authors:  M Lee Spangler; Margarita L Zuley; Jules H Sumkin; Gordan Abrams; Marie A Ganott; Christiane Hakim; Ronald Perrin; Denise M Chough; Ratan Shah; David Gur
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings.

Authors:  Ingvar Andersson; Debra M Ikeda; Sophia Zackrisson; Mark Ruschin; Tony Svahn; Pontus Timberg; Anders Tingberg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-07-19       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Prospective trial comparing full-field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population-based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Andriy I Bandos; Randi Gullien; Ellen B Eben; Ulrika Ekseth; Unni Haakenaasen; Mina Izadi; Ingvild N Jebsen; Gunnar Jahr; Mona Krager; Solveig Hofvind
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  5 in total

1.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications on planar projection images.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Yao Lu; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Jun Wei; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Computer-aided detection system for clustered microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis using joint information from volumetric and planar projection images.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Yao Lu; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Jun Wei; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Analysis of computer-aided detection techniques and signal characteristics for clustered microcalcifications on digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Suspicious Calcifications From Various Populations: A Comparison With Full-field Digital Mammography.

Authors:  Juntao Li; Hengwei Zhang; Hui Jiang; Xuhui Guo; Yinli Zhang; Dan Qi; Jitian Guan; Zhenzhen Liu; Erxi Wu; Suxia Luo
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 7.271

5.  Automatic Classification of Simulated Breast Tomosynthesis Whole Images for the Presence of Microcalcification Clusters Using Deep CNNs.

Authors:  Ana M Mota; Matthew J Clarkson; Pedro Almeida; Nuno Matela
Journal:  J Imaging       Date:  2022-08-29
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.