| Literature DB >> 35627938 |
Yassir Edrees Almalki1, Toufique Ahmed Soomro2, Muhammad Irfan3, Sharifa Khalid Alduraibi4, Ahmed Ali5.
Abstract
Breast cancer is widespread worldwide and can be cured if diagnosed early. Using digital mammogram images and image processing with artificial intelligence can play an essential role in breast cancer diagnosis. As many computerized algorithms for breast cancer diagnosis have significant limitations, such as noise handling and varying or low contrast in the images, it can be difficult to segment the abnormal region. These challenges could be overcome by proposing a new pre-processing model, exploring its impact on the post-processing module, and testing it on an extensive database. In this research work, the three-step method is proposed and validated on large databases of mammography images. The first step corresponded to the database classification, followed by the second step, which removed the pectoral muscle from the mammogram image. The third stage utilized new image-enhancement techniques and a new segmentation module to detect abnormal regions in a well-enhanced image to diagnose breast cancer. The pre-and post-processing modules are based on novel image processing techniques. The proposed method was tested using data collected from different hospitals in the Qassim Health Cluster, Qassim Province, Saudi Arabia. This database contained the five categories in the Breast Imaging and Reporting and Data System and consisted of 2892 images; the proposed method is analyzed using the publicly available Mammographic Image Analysis Society database, which contained 322 images. The proposed method gives good contrast enhancement with peak-signal to noise ratio improvement of 3 dB. The proposed method provides an accuracy of approximately 92% on 2892 images of Qassim Health Cluster, Qassim Province, Saudi Arabia. The proposed method gives approximately 97% on the Mammographic Image Analysis Society database. The novelty of the proposed work is that it could work on all Breast Imaging and Reporting and Data System categories. The performance of the proposed method demonstrated its ability to improve the diagnostic performance of the computerized breast cancer detection method.Entities:
Keywords: K-means; breast cancer; image enhancement; image segmentations; mammogram images; pectoral muscle
Year: 2022 PMID: 35627938 PMCID: PMC9142115 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10050801
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Categorization of mass in the BI-RADS by radiologists.
| Category | Remarks |
|---|---|
| 0 | Process is incomplete and requires further assessment. |
| 1 | Negative. |
| 2 | Benign finding. |
| 3 | Probably benign finding. |
| 4 | Suspicious abnormality. |
| 5 | Highly suggestive of malignancy. |
| 6 | Biopsy-proven malignancy. |
Figure 1Representation of standard mammographic views. The first rows represent the CC view of the right and left breast, and the second row represents the MLO view of the right and left breast.
Database information.
| Category | Number of Images |
|---|---|
| BI-RADs-1 | 996 |
| BI-RADs-2 | 817 |
| BI-RADs-3 | 371 |
| BI-RADs-4 | 452 |
| BI-RADs-5 | 256 |
Figure 2Final Breast image after pectoral muscle is partially removed.
Figure 3Enhanced breast image with its corresponding histogram.
Figure 4The output of our proposed post-processing step. The row shows output comparison of techniques: (a) Kmeans, (b) Kmeans Spatial, (c) Mean shift, (d) Mean shift Spatial and (e) Normalized cuts.
Performance of the proposed method based on the databases and categories.
| Without Pre-Processing Steps | With Pre-Processing Steps | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category of BI-RADS | PSNR | EME | PSNR | EME |
| BI-RADS-1 | 28.13 | 5.12 | 30.18 | 7.36 |
| BI-RADS-2 | 27.21 | 4.95 | 29.15 | 6.12 |
| BI-RADS-3 | 26.05 | 4.31 | 29.01 | 6.12 |
| BI-RADS-4 | 25.98 | 4.02 | 27.13 | 5.95 |
| BI-RADS-5 | 25.54 | 3.98 | 26.97 | 4.97 |
Figure 5Comparison of output of K-means and K-means spatial. The first column shows output of K-means and K-means spatial with cluster 2. The second column shows output of K-means and K-means spatial with cluster 4. The third column shows output of K-means and K-means spatial with cluster 6. The fourth column shows output of K-means and K-means spatial with cluster 8.
Performance of the proposed method based on the databases and categories.
| Category of BI-RADS | Specificity | Sensitivity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|
| BI-RADS-1 | 95.38 | 83.02 | 96.16 |
| BI-RADS-2 | 94.98 | 81.04 | 94.23 |
| BI-RADS-3 | 94.21 | 80.89 | 92.12 |
| BI-RADS-4 | 94.08 | 80.03 | 91.13 |
| BI-RADS-5 | 92.84 | 79.29 | 91.01 |
Performance of the proposed method on MIAS.
| Method | Images Used For Experiment | SP | SE | AC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raba et al. [ | 320 | - | - | 98 |
| Chen & Zwiggelaar [ | 322 | - | - | 92.8 |
| Maitra et al. [ | 322 | - | - | 95.7 |
| Peng et al. [ | 322 | - | - | 97.08 |
| Wirth & Stapinski [ | 25 | - | - | 97 |
| Kwok et al. [ | 322 | - | 88 | 83.9 |
| Ferrari et al. [ | 84 | - | - | 96 |
| Marti et al. [ | 65 | - | - | 97 |
| Hu et al. [ | 170 | - | 91.3 | - |
| Beena et al. [ | 60 | - | - | 83.33 |
| Kaitouni et al. [ | 322 | - | - | 91.92 |
| Podgornova et al. [ | 250 | - | - | 90.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|