Classification of Breast Masses Using a Computer-Aided Diagnosis Scheme of Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammograms
Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is a promising imaging modality in breast cancer diagnosis. This study aims to investigate how to optimally develop a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) scheme of CEDM images to classify breast masses. A CEDM dataset of 111 patients was assembled, which includes 33 benign and 78 malignant cases. Each CEDM includes two types of images namely, low energy (LE) and dual-energy subtracted (DES) images. A CAD scheme was applied to segment mass regions depicting on LE and DES images separately. Optimal segmentation results generated from DES images were also mapped to LE images or vice versa. After computing image features, multilayer perceptron based machine learning classifiers that integrate with a correlation-based feature subset evaluator and leave-one-case-out cross-validation method were built to classify mass regions. When applying CAD to DES and LE images with original segmentation, areas under ROC curves (AUC) were 0.759 ± 0.053 and 0.753 ± 0.047, respectively. After mapping the mass regions optimally segmented on DES images to LE images, AUC significantly increased to 0.848 ± 0.038 (p < 0.01). Study demonstrated that DES images eliminated overlapping effect of dense breast tissue, which helps improve mass segmentation accuracy. The study demonstrated that applying a novel approach to optimally map mass region segmented from DES images to LE images enabled CAD to yield significantly improved performance.
KeywordsBreast cancer diagnosis Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) Classification of breast masses Segmentation of breast mass regions Performance comparison
This work is supported in part by Grant R01 CA197150 from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, USA.
- 5.Carney, P. A., D. L. Miglioretti, B. C. Yankaskas, K. Kerlikowske, R. Rosenberg, C. M. Rutter, B. M. Geller, L. A. Abraham, S. H. Taplin, M. M. Dignan, and R. Gary Cutter. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann. Intern. Med. 138:168–175, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Lee, A. Y., D. J. Wisner, S. Aminololama-Shakeri, V. A. Arasu, S. A. Feig, J. Hargreaves, H. Ojeda-Fournier, L. W. Bassett, C. J. Wells, J. De Guzman, C. I. Flowers, J. E. Campbell, S. L. Elson, H. Retallack, and B. N. Joe. Inter-reader variability in the use of BI-RADS descriptors for suspicious findings on diagnostic mammography: a multi-institution study of 10 academic radiologists. Acad. Radiol. 24:60–66, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Qiu, Y., S. Yan, R. R. Gundreddy, Y. Wang, S. Cheng, H. Liu, and B. Zheng. A new approach to develop computer-aided diagnosis scheme of breast mass classification using deep learning technology. J. Xray. Sci. Technol. 25:751–763, 2017.Google Scholar
- 25.Wang, Y., F. Aghaei, A. Zarafshani, Y. Qiu, W. Qian, and B. Zheng. Computer-aided classification of mammographic masses using visually sensitive image features. J. Xray. Sci. Technol. 25:171–186, 2017.Google Scholar
- 28.Witten, I. H., E. Frank, and M. A. Hall. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques (3rd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2011.Google Scholar