Yang Zhang1, Jeon-Hor Chen2, Kai-Ting Chang1, Vivian Youngjean Park3, Min Jung Kim3, Siwa Chan4, Peter Chang1, Daniel Chow1, Alex Luk1, Tiffany Kwong1, Min-Ying Su5. 1. Department of Radiological Sciences, John Tu and Thomas Yuen Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, University of California, 164 Irvine Hall, Irvine, CA, 92697-5020. 2. Department of Radiological Sciences, John Tu and Thomas Yuen Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, University of California, 164 Irvine Hall, Irvine, CA, 92697-5020; Department of Radiology, E-Da Hospital and I-Shou University, No. 1, Yida Road, Jiaosu Village, Yanchao District, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 8244. Electronic address: jeonhc01@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Medical Imaging, Taichung Tzu-Chi Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 5. Department of Radiological Sciences, John Tu and Thomas Yuen Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, University of California, 164 Irvine Hall, Irvine, CA, 92697-5020. Electronic address: msu@uci.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Breast segmentation using the U-net architecture was implemented and tested in independent validation datasets to quantify fibroglandular tissue volume in breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two datasets were used. The training set was MRI of 286 patients with unilateral breast cancer. The segmentation was done on the contralateral normal breasts. The ground truth for the breast and fibroglandular tissue (FGT) was obtained by using a template-based segmentation method. The U-net deep learning algorithm was implemented to analyze the training set, and the final model was obtained using 10-fold cross-validation. The independent validation set was MRI of 28 normal volunteers acquired using four different MR scanners. Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), voxel-based accuracy, and Pearson's correlation were used to evaluate the performance. RESULTS: For the 10-fold cross-validation in the initial training set of 286 patients, the DSC range was 0.83-0.98 (mean 0.95 ± 0.02) for breast and 0.73-0.97 (mean 0.91 ± 0.03) for FGT; and the accuracy range was 0.92-0.99 (mean 0.98 ± 0.01) for breast and 0.87-0.99 (mean 0.97 ± 0.01) for FGT. For the entire 224 testing breasts of the 28 normal volunteers in the validation datasets, the mean DSC was 0.86 ± 0.05 for breast, 0.83 ± 0.06 for FGT; and the mean accuracy was 0.94 ± 0.03 for breast and 0.93 ± 0.04 for FGT. The testing results for MRI acquired using four different scanners were comparable. CONCLUSION: Deep learning based on the U-net algorithm can achieve accurate segmentation results for the breast and FGT on MRI. It may provide a reliable and efficient method to process large number of MR images for quantitative analysis of breast density.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Breast segmentation using the U-net architecture was implemented and tested in independent validation datasets to quantify fibroglandular tissue volume in breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two datasets were used. The training set was MRI of 286 patients with unilateral breast cancer. The segmentation was done on the contralateral normal breasts. The ground truth for the breast and fibroglandular tissue (FGT) was obtained by using a template-based segmentation method. The U-net deep learning algorithm was implemented to analyze the training set, and the final model was obtained using 10-fold cross-validation. The independent validation set was MRI of 28 normal volunteers acquired using four different MR scanners. Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), voxel-based accuracy, and Pearson's correlation were used to evaluate the performance. RESULTS: For the 10-fold cross-validation in the initial training set of 286 patients, the DSC range was 0.83-0.98 (mean 0.95 ± 0.02) for breast and 0.73-0.97 (mean 0.91 ± 0.03) for FGT; and the accuracy range was 0.92-0.99 (mean 0.98 ± 0.01) for breast and 0.87-0.99 (mean 0.97 ± 0.01) for FGT. For the entire 224 testing breasts of the 28 normal volunteers in the validation datasets, the mean DSC was 0.86 ± 0.05 for breast, 0.83 ± 0.06 for FGT; and the mean accuracy was 0.94 ± 0.03 for breast and 0.93 ± 0.04 for FGT. The testing results for MRI acquired using four different scanners were comparable. CONCLUSION: Deep learning based on the U-net algorithm can achieve accurate segmentation results for the breast and FGT on MRI. It may provide a reliable and efficient method to process large number of MR images for quantitative analysis of breast density.
Authors: Christiane K Kuhl; Simone Schrading; Kevin Strobel; Hans H Schild; Ralf-Dieter Hilgers; Heribert B Bieling Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michiel Kallenberg; Kersten Petersen; Mads Nielsen; Andrew Y Ng; Christian Igel; Celine M Vachon; Katharina Holland; Rikke Rass Winkel; Nico Karssemeijer; Martin Lillholm Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Kelly H Zou; Simon K Warfield; Aditya Bharatha; Clare M C Tempany; Michael R Kaus; Steven J Haker; William M Wells; Ferenc A Jolesz; Ron Kikinis Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Karen J Wernli; Wendy B DeMartini; Laura Ichikawa; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise M Henderson; Berta M Geller; Mike Hofmann; Bonnie C Yankaskas Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: S Hennessey; E Huszti; A Gunasekura; A Salleh; L Martin; S Minkin; S Chavez; N F Boyd Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2014-01-30 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Leon Lenchik; Laura Heacock; Ashley A Weaver; Robert D Boutin; Tessa S Cook; Jason Itri; Christopher G Filippi; Rao P Gullapalli; James Lee; Marianna Zagurovskaya; Tara Retson; Kendra Godwin; Joey Nicholson; Ponnada A Narayana Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2019-08-10 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Geraldine J Liao; Leah C Henze Bancroft; Roberta M Strigel; Rhea D Chitalia; Despina Kontos; Linda Moy; Savannah C Partridge; Habib Rahbar Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jonghyun Bae; Zhengnan Huang; Florian Knoll; Krzysztof Geras; Terlika Pandit Sood; Li Feng; Laura Heacock; Linda Moy; Sungheon Gene Kim Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-01-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Alexandra Bermudez; Zachary Gonzalez; Bao Zhao; Ethan Salter; Xuanqing Liu; Leixin Ma; Mohammad Khalid Jawed; Cho-Jui Hsieh; Neil Y C Lin Journal: Biophys J Date: 2022-08-27 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Vishwa S Parekh; Katarzyna J Macura; Susan C Harvey; Ihab R Kamel; Riham Ei-Khouli; David A Bluemke; Michael A Jacobs Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-11-22 Impact factor: 4.071