Literature DB >> 33304615

Spatial Correlation and Breast Cancer Risk.

Erin E E Fowler1, Cassandra Hathaway1, Fabryann Tillman1, Robert Weinfurtner2, Thomas A Sellers1, John Heine1.   

Abstract

We present a novel method for evaluating local spatial correlation structure in two-dimensional (2D) mammograms and evaluate its capability for risk prediction as one possible application. Two matched case-control studies were analyzed. Study 1 included women (N = 588 pairs) with mammograms acquired with either Hologic Selenia full field digital mammography (FFDM) units or Hologic Dimensions digital breast tomosynthesis units. Study 2 included women (N =180 pairs) with mammograms acquired with a General Electric Senographe 2000D FFDM unit. Matching variables included age, HRT usage/duration, screening history, and mammography unit. Local autocorrelation functions were determined with Fourier analysis and compared with a template defined as a 2D double-sided exponential function with one spatial extent parameter: n = 4, 12, 24, 50, 74, 100, and 124, where (n+1)×(n+1) is the area of the local spatial extent measured in pixels. The difference between the local correlation and template was gauged within an adjustable parameter kernel and summarized, producing two measures: the mean (mn+1), and standard deviation (sn+1). Both adjustable parameters were varied in Study 1. Select measures that produced significant associations with breast cancer were translated to Study 2. Breast cancer associations were evaluated with conditional logistic regression, adjusted for body mass index and ethnicity. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated as per standard deviation increment with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Two measures were selected for breast cancer association analysis in Study 1: m75 and s25. Both measures revealed significant associations with breast cancer: OR = 1.45 (1.23, 1.66) for m75 and OR = 1.30 (1.14, 1.49) for s25. When translating to Study 2, these measures also revealed significant associations: OR = 1.49 (1.12, 1.96) for m75 and OR = 1.34 (1.06, 1.69) for s25. Novel correlation metrics presented in this work produced significant associations with breast cancer risk. This approach is general and may have applications beyond mammography.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fourier analysis; breast cancer risk; breast density; calibration; mammography

Year:  2019        PMID: 33304615      PMCID: PMC7725237          DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ab1dad

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express        ISSN: 2057-1976


  27 in total

1.  Spectral analysis of full field digital mammography data.

Authors:  John J Heine; Robert P Velthuizen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Modelling the power spectra of natural images: statistics and information.

Authors:  A van der Schaaf; J H van Hateren
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Unsupervised Deep Learning Applied to Breast Density Segmentation and Mammographic Risk Scoring.

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

4.  Estimating the receiver operating characteristic curve in studies that match controls to cases on covariates.

Authors:  Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Jing Fan; Christopher W Seymour
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  A deep learning method for classifying mammographic breast density categories.

Authors:  Aly A Mohamed; Wendie A Berg; Hong Peng; Yahong Luo; Rachel C Jankowitz; Shandong Wu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: evaluation of a novel method of measuring breast tissue volumes.

Authors:  Norman Boyd; Lisa Martin; Anoma Gunasekara; Olga Melnichouk; Gord Maudsley; Chris Peressotti; Martin Yaffe; Salomon Minkin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Lisa J Martin; Martin J Yaffe; Salomon Minkin
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 6.466

Review 8.  Imaging Breast Density: Established and Emerging Modalities.

Authors:  Jeon-Hor Chen; Gultekin Gulsen; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 4.243

Review 9.  Qualitative Versus Quantitative Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: Applications for the US and Abroad.

Authors:  Stamatia Destounis; Andrea Arieno; Renee Morgan; Christina Roberts; Ariane Chan
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-31

Review 10.  Beyond breast density: a review on the advancing role of parenchymal texture analysis in breast cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  Aimilia Gastounioti; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.