Characterization of masses in digital breast tomosynthesis: Comparison of machine learning in projection views and reconstructed slices

被引:25
|
作者
Chan, Heang-Ping [1 ]
Wu, Yi-Ta [1 ]
Sahiner, Berkman [1 ]
Wei, Jun [1 ]
Helvie, Mark A. [1 ]
Zhang, Yiheng [1 ]
Moore, Richard H. [2 ]
Kopans, Daniel B. [2 ]
Hadjiiski, Lubomir [1 ]
Way, Ted [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
digital breast tomosynthesis; computer-aided diagnosis; mass; SART; COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGISTS CHARACTERIZATION; MAMMOGRAPHIC MASSES; CLASSIFICATION; IMPROVEMENT; PERFORMANCE; OBSERVER; CANCER;
D O I
10.1118/1.3432570
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: In digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), quasi-three-dimensional (3D) structural information is reconstructed from a small number of 2D projection view (PV) mammograms acquired over a limited angular range. The authors developed preliminary computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) methods for classification of malignant and benign masses and compared the effectiveness of analyzing lesion characteristics in the reconstructed DBT slices and in the PVs. Methods: A data set of MLO view DBT of 99 patients containing 107 masses (56 malignant and 51 benign) was collected at the Massachusetts General Hospital with IRB approval. The DBTs were obtained with a GE prototype system which acquired 11 PVs over a 50 arc. The authors reconstructed the DBTs at 1 mm slice interval using a simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique. The region of interest (ROI) containing the mass was marked by a radiologist in the DBT volume and the corresponding ROIs on the PVs were derived based on the imaging geometry. The subsequent processes were fully automated. For classification of masses using the DBT-slice approach, the mass on each slice was segmented by an active contour model initialized with adaptive k-means clustering. A spiculation likelihood map was generated by analysis of the gradient directions around the mass margin and spiculation features were extracted from the map. The rubber band straightening transform (RBST) was applied to a band of pixels around the segmented mass boundary. The RBST image was enhanced by Sobel filtering in the horizontal and vertical directions, from which run-length statistics texture features were extracted. Morphological features including those from the normalized radial length were designed to describe the mass shape. A feature space composed of the spiculation features, texture features, and morphological features extracted from the central slice alone and seven feature spaces obtained by averaging the corresponding features from three to 19 slices centered at the central slice were compared. For classification of masses using the PV approach, a feature extraction process similar to that described above for the DBT approach was performed on the ROIs from the individual PVs. Six feature spaces obtained from the central PV alone and by averaging the corresponding features from three to 11 PVs were formed. In each feature space for either the DBT-slice or the PV approach, a linear discriminant analysis classifier with stepwise feature selection was trained and tested using a two-loop leave-one-case-out resampling procedure. Simplex optimization was used to guide feature selection automatically within the training set in each leave-one-case-out cycle. The performance of the classifiers was evaluated by the area (A(z)) under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: The test Az values from the DBT-slice approach ranged from 0.87 +/- 0.03 to 0.93 +/- 0.02, while those from the PV approach ranged from 0.78 +/- 0.04 to 0.84 +/- 0.04. The highest test Az of 0.93 +/- 0.02 from the nine-DBT-slice feature space was significantly (p=0.006) better than the highest test Az of 0.84 +/- 0.04 from the nine-PV feature space. Conclusion: The features of breast lesions extracted from the DBT slices consistently provided higher classification accuracy than those extracted from the PV images. (c) 2010 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [DOI: 10.1118/1.3432570]
引用
收藏
页码:3576 / 3586
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Semi-automated Segmentation and Classification of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Reconstructed Images
    Vedantham, Srinivasan
    Shi, Linxi
    Karellas, Andrew
    Michaelsen, Kelly E.
    Krishnaswamy, Venkataramanan
    Pogue, Brian W.
    Paulsen, Keith D.
    2011 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY (EMBC), 2011, : 6188 - 6191
  • [42] Virtual assessment of stereoscopic viewing of digital breast tomosynthesis projection images
    Wen, Gezheng
    Chang, Ho-Chang
    Reinhold, Jacob
    Lo, Joseph Y.
    Markey, Mia K.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2018, 5 (01)
  • [43] Digital breast tomosynthesis at screening assessment: are two views always necessary?
    Haq, Rabea
    Lim, Yit Y.
    Maxwell, Anthony J.
    Hurley, Emma
    Beetles, Ursula
    Bundred, Sara
    Wilson, Mary
    Astley, Susan
    Gilbert, Fiona J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 88 (1055):
  • [44] Value of digital breast tomosynthesis in characterization of breast lesions in dense breast
    Romeih, Marwa
    Raafat, Tarek Ahmed
    Ahmed, Gehad
    Shalaby, Shymaa Abd El-Mawla
    Ahmed, Wafaa Ali Heidar
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2024, 55 (01):
  • [45] Digital tomosynthesis mammography: Improvement of artifact reduction method for high-attenuation objects on reconstructed slices
    Ge, Jun
    Chan, Heang-Ping
    Sahiner, Berkman
    Zhang, Yiheng
    Wei, Jun
    Hadjiiski, Lubomir M.
    Zhou, Chuan
    Wu, Yi-Ta
    Shi, Jiazheng
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2008: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1-3, 2008, 6913
  • [46] Texture in digital breast tomosynthesis: A comparison between mammographic and tomographic characterization of parenchymal properties
    Kontos, Despina
    Bakic, Predrag R.
    Maidment, Andrew D. A.
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2008: COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS, PTS 1 AND 2, 2008, 6915
  • [47] Screening the Implant-Augmented Breast with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Is Tomosynthesis Necessary for Non-implant-Displaced Views?
    Nguyen, Derek L.
    Grimm, Lars J.
    Nelson, Jeffrey S.
    Johnson, Karen S.
    Ghate, Sujata, V
    JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING, 2024, 6 (03) : 261 - 270
  • [48] Evaluation of denoising digital breast tomosynthesis data in both projection and image domains and a study of noise model on digital breast tomosynthesis image domain
    Scarparo, Daniele Cristina
    Pinheiro Salvadeo, Denis Henrique
    Guimaraes Pedronette, Daniel Carlos
    Barufaldi, Bruno
    Arnold Maidment, Andrew Douglas
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2019, 6 (03)
  • [49] Deep Learning Framework for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Reconstruction
    Moriakov, Nikita
    Michielsen, Koen
    Adler, Jonas
    Mann, Ritse
    Sechopoulos, Ioannis
    Teuwen, Jonas
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2019: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2019, 10948
  • [50] Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of diagnostic accuracy
    Svahn, T. M.
    Chakraborty, D. P.
    Ikeda, D.
    Zackrisson, S.
    Do, Y.
    Mattsson, S.
    Andersson, I.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 85 (1019): : E1074 - E1082