Within-brain classification for brain tumor segmentation

Abstract

Purpose

In this paper, we investigate a framework for interactive brain tumor segmentation which, at its core, treats the problem of interactive brain tumor segmentation as a machine learning problem.

Methods

This method has an advantage over typical machine learning methods for this task where generalization is made across brains. The problem with these methods is that they need to deal with intensity bias correction and other MRI-specific noise. In this paper, we avoid these issues by approaching the problem as one of within brain generalization. Specifically, we propose a semi-automatic method that segments a brain tumor by training and generalizing within that brain only, based on some minimum user interaction.

Conclusion

We investigate how adding spatial feature coordinates (i.e., i, j, k) to the intensity features can significantly improve the performance of different classification methods such as SVM, kNN and random forests. This would only be possible within an interactive framework. We also investigate the use of a more appropriate kernel and the adaptation of hyper-parameters specifically for each brain.

Results

As a result of these experiments, we obtain an interactive method whose results reported on the MICCAI-BRATS 2013 dataset are the second most accurate compared to published methods, while using significantly less memory and processing power than most state-of-the-art methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Notes

  1. 1.

    Please note that the results mentioned in Table 5 are from methods competing in the BRATS 2013 challenge for which a static table is provided (https://www.virtualskeleton.ch/BRATS/StaticResults2013). Since then, other methods have been added to the score board but for which no reference is available.

References

  1. 1.

    Bauer S, Nolte L, Reyes M (2011) Fully automatic segmentation of brain tumor images using support vector machine classification in combination with hierarchical conditional random field regularization. In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, Berlin, pp 354–361

  2. 2.

    Bauer S, Wiest R, Nolte L, Reyes M (2013) A survey of MRI-based medical image analysis for brain tumor studies. Phys Med Biol 58(13):R97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Cai H, Verma R, Ou Y, Lee S, Melhem E, Davatzikos C (2007) Probabilistic segmentation of brain tumors based on multi-modality magnetic resonance images. In: Biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, 2007. ISBI 2007. 4th IEEE international symposium on, IEEE, pp 600–603

  4. 4.

    Cortes C, Vapnik V (1995) Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 20(3):273–297

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Hamamci A, Unal G (2012) Multimodal brain tumor segmentation using the tumor-cut method on the brats dataset. In: Proceedings of the workshop on brain tumor segmentation, MICCAI pp 19–23

  6. 6.

    Hamamci A, Kucuk N, Karaman K, Engin K, Unal G (2012) Tumor-cut: segmentation of brain tumors on contrast enhanced MR images for radiosurgery applications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 31(3):790–804

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Ho S, Bullitt E, Gerig G (2002) Level-set evolution with region competition: automatic 3-D segmentation of brain tumors. In: Proceedings of the international conference pattern recognition, vol 1, pp 532–535

  8. 8.

    Huo J, Okada K, van Rikxoort EM, Kim HJ, Alger JR, Pope WB, Goldin JG, Brown MS (2013) Ensemble segmentation for GBM brain tumors on MR images using confidence-based averaging. Med Phys 40(9):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Jiang C, Zhang X, Huang W, Meinel C (2004) Segmentation and quantification of brain tumor. In: Virtual environments, human-computer interfaces and measurement systems, 2004. (VECIMS). 2004 IEEE Symposium on, pp 61–66

  10. 10.

    Lampert CH (2009) Kernel methods in computer vision. Found Trends Comput Graph Vis 4(3):193–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Lee C, Wang S, Murtha A, Brown M, Greiner R (2008) Segmenting brain tumors using pseudo-conditional random fields. In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, Berlin, pp 359–366

  12. 12.

    Luts J, Heerschap A, Suykens J, Huffel SV (2007) A combined MRI and MRSI based multiclass system for brain tumour recognition using LS-SVMS with class probabilities and feature selection. Artif Intell Med 40(2):87–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Menze BH, Jakab A, Bauer S, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Farahani K, Kirby J, Burren Y, Porz N, Slotboom J, Wiest R, Lanczi L, Gerstner E, Weber MA, Arbel T, Avants BB, Ayache N, Buendia P, Collins DL, Cordier N, Corso JJ, Criminisi A, Das T, Delingette H, Demiralp C, Durst CR, Dojat M, Doyle S, Festa J, Forbes F, Geremia E, Glocker B, Golland P, Guo X, Hamamci A, Iftekharuddin KM, Jena R, John NM, Konukoglu E, Lashkari D, Mariz JA, Meier R, Pereira S, Precup D, Price SJ, Riklin Raviv T, Reza SMS, Ryan M, Sarikaya D, Schwartz L, Shin HC, Shotton J, Silva C.A, Sousa N, Subbanna NK, Szekely G, Taylor TJ, Thomas OM, Tustison NJ, Unal G, Vasseur F, Wintermark M, Ye DH, Zhao L, Zhao B, Zikic D, Prastawa M, Reyes M, Van Leemput K (2015) The multimodal brain tumor image segmentation benchmark (BRATS). IEEE Trans Med Imaging 34(10):1993–2024. doi:10.1109/TMI.2014.2377694

  14. 14.

    Murphy K (2012) Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Platt J (1999) Probabilistic outputs for support vector machines and comparisons to regularized likelihood methods. In: Advances in large margin classifiers, Citeseer

  16. 16.

    Prastawa M, Bullitt E, Ho S, Gerig G (2003) Robust estimation for brain tumor segmentation. In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention—MICCAI 2003. Springer, Berlin, pp 530–537

  17. 17.

    Schmidt M, Levner I, Greiner R, Murtha A, Bistritz A (2005) Segmenting brain tumors using alignment-based features. In: International conference on machine learning and applications, p 6

  18. 18.

    Subbanna N, Precup D, Arbel T (2014) Iterative multilevel MRF leveraging context and voxel information for brain tumour segmentation in MRI. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, Columbus, Ohio, pp 400–405

  19. 19.

    Vaidyanathan M, Clarke L, Velthuizen R, Phuphanich S, Bensaid A, Hall L, Bezdek J, Greenberg H, Trotti A, Silbiger M (1995) Comparison of supervised MRI segmentation methods for tumor volume determination during therapy. Magn Reson Imaging 13(5):719–728

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Wang T, Cheng I, Basu A (2009) Fluid vector flow and applications in brain tumor segmentation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56(3):781–789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Havaei.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Havaei, M., Larochelle, H., Poulin, P. et al. Within-brain classification for brain tumor segmentation. Int J CARS 11, 777–788 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1311-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Within-brain generalization
  • Machine learning
  • Brain tumor segmentation
  • Computer-aided detection
  • Segmentation
  • Interactive