Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A novel classifier model for mass classification using BI-RADS category in ultrasound images based on Type-2 fuzzy inference system

  • Published:
Sādhanā Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ultrasound imaging is an imaging technique for early detection of breast cancer. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon, developed by The American College of Radiology, provides a standard for expert doctors to interpret the ultrasound images of breast cancer. This standard describes the features to classify the tumour as benign or malignant and it also categorizes the biopsy requirement as a percentage. Biopsy is an invasive method that doctors use for diagnosis of breast cancer. Computer-aided detection (CAD)/diagnosis systems that are designed to include the feature standards used in benign/malignant classification help the doctors in diagnosis but they do not provide enough information about the BI-RADS category of the mass. These systems classify the benign tumours with 90% biopsy possibility (BI-RADS-4) and with 2% biopsy possibility (BI-RADS-2) in the same category. There are some studies in the literature that make category classification via commonly used classifier methods but their success rates are low. In this study, a two-layer, high-success-rate classifier model based on Type-2 fuzzy inference is developed, which classifies the tumour as benign or malignant with its BI-RADS category by incorporating the opinions of the expert doctors. A 99.34% success rate in benign/malignant classification and a 92% success rate in category classification (BI-RADS 2, 3, 4, 5) were obtained in the accuracy tests. These results indicate that the CAD system is valuable as a means of providing a second diagnostic opinion when radiologists carry out mass diagnosis.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dhahbi S, Barhoumi W and Zagrouba E 2015 Breast cancer diagnosis in digitized mammograms using curvelet moments. Computer in Biology and Medicine 64: 79–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dora L, Agraval S, Panda R and Abraham A 2017 Optimal breast cancer classification using Gauss–Newton representation based algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications 85: 134–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lo C M, Lai Y C, Chou Y H and Chang R F 2015 Quantitative breast lesion classification based on multichannel distributions in shear-wave imaging. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 122: 354–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Reidt J M 1959 Diagnostic applications of ultrasound. Proceedings of the IRE 47: 1963–1967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shi X, Cheng H D, Hu L, Ju W and Tian J 2010 Detection and classification of masses in breast ultrasound images. Digital Signal Processing 20: 824–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stines J 2007 BI-RADS: Use in the French radiologic community. How to overcome with some difficulties. European Journal of Radiology 61: 224–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hong A S, Rosen E L, Soo M S and Baker J 2005 BI-RADS for sonography: positive sonographic features. American Journal of Roentgenology 184: 1260–1265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park S, Shin D K and Kim J S 2013 Components of computer-aided diagnosis for breast ultrasound. IT Convergence Practice (INPRA) 1: 50–63

    Google Scholar 

  9. Liu B, Cheng H D, Huang J, Tian J, Tang X and Liu J 2010 Fully automatic and segmentation-robust classification of breast tumors based on local texture analysis of ultrasound images. Pattern Recognition 43: 280–298

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Cheng H D, Shan J, Ju W, Guo Y and Zhang L 2010 Automated breast cancer detection and classification using ultrasound images: a survey. Pattern Recognition 43: 299–317

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Stoitsis J, Valavanis I, Mougiakakou S G, Golemati S, Nikita A and Nikita K S 2006 Computer aided diagnosis based on medical image processing and artificial intelligence methods. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research 569: 591–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sampaio W B, Diniz E M, Silva A C, Paiva A C and Gattass M 2011 Detection of masses in mammogram images using CNN, geostatistic functions and SVM. Computers in Biology and Medicine 41: 653–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chiou H J, Chen C Y, Liu T C, Chiou S Y, Wang H K, Chou Y H and Chiang H K 2009 Computer-aided diagnosis of peripheral soft tissue masses based on ultrasound imaging. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 33: 408–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Prabusankarlal K M, Manavalan R and Sivaranjani R 2017 An optimized non local means filter using automated clustering based preclassification through gap statistics for speckle reduction in breast ultrasound images. Applied Computing and Informatics 14(1): 48–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Deka B and Bora P K 2013 Removal of correlated speckle noise using sparse and overcomplete representations. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 8: 520–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Latifoglu F 2013 A novel approach to speckle noise filtering based on Artificial Bee Colony algorithm: an ultrasound image application. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 111: 561–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Guo Y, Wang Y and Hou T 2011 Speckle filtering of ultrasonic images using a modified non local-based algorithm. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 6: 129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shan J 2011 A fully automatic segmentation method for breast ultrasound images. Mphil Thesis, Utah State University, Logan, Utah

  19. Sellami L, Sassi O B, Chtourou K and Hamida A B 2015 Breast cancer ultrasound images sequence exploration using BI-RADS features extraction: towards an advanced clinical aided tool for precise lesion characterization. IEEE Transactions on Nanobioscience 14: 740–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Huang Y L, Wang K L and Chen D R 2006 Diagnosis of breast tumors with ultrasonic texture analysis using support vector machines. Neural Computing and Applications 15: 164–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhou S, Shi J, Zhu J, Cai Y and Wang R 2013 Shearlet-based texture feature extraction for classification of breast tumor in ultrasound image. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 8: 688–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nasser M A, Melendez J, Moreno A, Omer O A and Puig D 2017 Breast tumor classification in ultrasound images using texture analysis and super-resolution methods. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 59: 84–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Xian G M 2010 An identification method of malignant and benign liver tumors from ultrasonography based on GLCM texture features and fuzzy SVM. Expert Systems with Applications 37: 6737–6741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gonzales R and Woods R E 1992 Digital image processing, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, USA: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ondimu S N and Murase H 2008 Effect of probability-distance based Markovian texture extraction on discrimination in biological imaging. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 63: 2–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Haralick R M, Shanmugam K and Dinstein I 1973 Textural features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 3(6): 610–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Materka A and Strzelecki M 1998 Texture analysis methods – a review. Tecnical University of Lodz, Institute of Electronics, COST B11 Report, Brussels

  28. Amin K M, Shahin A I and Guo Y 2016 A novel breast tumor classification algorithm using neutrosophic score features. Measurement 81: 210–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chang R F, Wu W J, Moon W K and Chen D R 2005 Automatic ultrasound segmentation and morphology based diagnosis of solid breast tumors. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 89: 179–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Menon R V, Raha P, Kothari S, Chakraborty, Chakrabarti I and Karim R 2015 Automated detection and classification of mass from breast ultrasound images. In: Proceedings of the NCVPRIPG Conference, 16–19 December, Patna, India, pp. 3–6

  31. Chen D R, Chien C L and Kuo Y F 2015 Computer-aided assessment of tumor grade for breast cancer in ultrasound images. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine ID 914091, 6 pp.

  32. Chen Y and Huang Q 2016 An approach based on biclustering and neural network for classification of lesions in breast ultrasound. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Mechatronics, 18–20 August 2016, Macau, China, pp. 597–601

  33. Singh B K, Verma K and Thoke A S 2016 Fuzzy cluster based neural network classifier for classifying breast tumors in ultrasound images. Expert Systems with Applications 66: 114–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wu W J, Lin S W and Moon W K 2012 Combining support vector machine with genetic algorithm to classify ultrasound breast tumor images. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 36: 627–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Liao R, Wan T and Qin Z 2011 Classification of benign and malignant breast tumors in ultrasound images based on multiple sonographic and textural features. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Intelligent Human–Machine Systems and Cybernetics, 10 October 2011, Zhejiang, China, pp. 71–74

  36. Singh B K, Verma K, Thoke A S and Suri J S 2017 Risk stratification of 2D ultrasound-based breast lesions using hybrid feature selection in machine learning paradigm. Measurement 105: 146–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lee H and Chen Y P P 2015 Image based computer aided diagnosis system for cancer detection. Expert Systems with Applications 42: 5356–5365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Prabusankarlal K M, Thirumoorthy P and Manavalan R 2015 Assessment of combined textural and morphological features for diagnosis of breast masses in ultrasound. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences 5: 12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Alvarenga A V, Infantosi A F C, Pereira W C A and Azevedo C M 2010 Assessing the performance of morphological parameters in distinguishing breast tumors on ultrasound images. Medical Engineering & Physics 32: 49–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Minavathi, Murali S and Dinesh M S 2012 Classification of mass in breast ultrasound images using image processing techniques. International Journal of Computer Applications 42: 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Saranya P K and Samundeeswari E S 2016 A study on morphological and textural features for classifying breast lesion. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology 5: 3267–3279

    Google Scholar 

  42. Nayeem M A R, Joadder A M, Shetu S A, Jamil F R and Helal A A 2014 Feature selection for breast cancer detection from ultrasound images. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Informatics, Electronics & Vision (ICIEV), 23–24 May 2014, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. 1–6

  43. Raza S, Goldkamp A L, Chikarmane S and Birdwell R L 2010 US of breast masses categorized as BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5: pictorial review of factors influencing clinical management. Radiographics 30: 1199–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Huang Y L, Chen D R, Jiang Y R, Kuo S J, Wu H K and Moon W K 2008 Computer-aided diagnosis using morphological features for classifying breast lesions on ultrasound. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 32: 565–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. George Y M, Zayed H H, Roushdy M I and Elbagoury B M 2014 Remote computer-aided breast cancer detection and diagnosis system based on cytological images. IEEE Systems Journal 8: 949–964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Gonzaga M A 2010 How accurate is ultrasound in evaluating palpable breast masses? Pan African Medical Journal 7: 1937–8688

    Google Scholar 

  47. Tan T, Platel B, Huisman B H, Sanchez C I, Mus R and Karssemeijer N. Computer-aided lesion diagnosis in automated 3-D breast ultrasound using coronal spiculation. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 31: 1034–1042

  48. Rangayyan R M, Mudigonda N R and Desautels J E L 2000 Boundary modelling and shape analysis methods for classification of mammographic masses. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing 38: 487–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Shen L, Rangayyan R M and Desautels J E L 1994 Application of shape analysis to mammographic calcifications. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 13: 263–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Joo S, Moon W K and Kim H C 2004 Computer-aided diagnosis of solid breast nodules: use of an artificial neural network based on multiple sonographic features. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 23: 1292–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Barbucha D, Nguyen N T and Batubara J 2015 New trends in intelligent information and database systems. In: Verma K, Singh B K, Tripathi P and Thoke A S (Eds). Review of feature selection algorithms for breast cancer ultrasound image. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 23–32

    Google Scholar 

  52. Azar A T and El-Said S A 2013 Probabilistic neural network for breast cancer classification. Neural Computing and Applications 23: 1737–1751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Moon W K, et al 2017 Computer-aided tumor diagnosis using shear wave breast elastography. Ultrasonics 78: 125–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Chen D R, Chang R F, Chen J C, Ho M F, Kuo S J, Chen S T, Hung S J and Moon W K 2005 Classification of breast ultrasound images using fractal feature. Journal of Clinical Imaging 29: 235–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Acharya U R, Ng W L, Rahmat K, Sudarshan V K, Koh J E W, Tan J H, Yeong C H and Ng K H 2017 Data mining framework for breast lesion classification in shear wave ultrasound: a hybrid feature paradigm. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 33: 400–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Ding J, Cheng H D, Xian M, Zhang Y and Xu F 2015 Local-weighted citation—kNN algorithm for breast ultrasound image classification. Optik 126: 5188–5193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zadeh L A 1975 Fuzzy logic and approximate reasoning. Synthese 30: 407–428

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  58. Mamdani E H 1974 Application of fuzzy algorithms for control of simple dynamic plant. Proceedings of the Institution of Electrical Engineers 121: 1585–1588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Choi B I, Chung F and Rhee H 2009 Interval type-2 fuzzy membership function generation methods for pattern recognition. Information Sciences 179: 2102–2122

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Akgun A, Sezer E A, Nefeslioglu H A, Gokceoglu C and Pradhan B 2012 An easy-to-use MATLAB program (MamLand) for the assessment of landslide susceptibility using a Mamdani fuzzy algorithm. Computers and Geosciences 38: 23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Mendel J M 2007 Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems: an overview. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 2: 20–29

    Google Scholar 

  62. Castillo O and Melin P 2012 Type-2 fuzzy logic systems. In: Recent advances in interval type-2 fuzzy systems. Heidelberg–New York–Dordrecht–London: Springer

  63. Hosseini R, Qanadli S D, Barman S, Mazinani M, Ellis T and Dehmeshki J 2012 An automatic approach for learning and tuning Gaussian interval type-2 fuzzy membership functions applied to lung CAD classification system. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 20: 224–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Juang C F, Huang R B and Lin Y Y 2009 A recurrent self-evolving interval type-2 fuzzy neural network for dynamic system processing. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 17: 1092–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Zhai D and Mendel J M 2011 Uncertainty measures for general Type-2 fuzzy sets. Information Sciences 181: 503–518

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  66. Mendel J M, John R I and Liu F 2006 Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems made simple. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 14: 808–821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Hidalgo D, Melin P and Castillo O 2012 An optimization method for designing type-2 fuzzy inference systems based on the footprint of uncertainty using genetic algorithms. Expert Systems with Applications 39: 4590–4598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Raffei A F M, Asmuni H, Hassan R and Othman R M. A low lighting or contrast ratio visible iris recognition using iso-contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization. Knowledge-Based Systems 74: 40–48

  69. Sha C, Hou J and Cui H 2016 A robust 2D Otsu’s thresholding method in image segmentation. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation. 41: 339–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Gomez W, Leija L, Pereira W C A and Infantosi A F C 2009 Morphological operators on the segmentation of breast ultrasound images. In: Proceedings of the Pan American Health Care Exchanges – PAHCE, 16–20 March 2009, Mexico City, Mexico, pp. 67–71

  71. Moon W K, Lo M C, Cho N, Chang J M, Huang C S, Chen J H and Chang R F 2013 Computer-aided diagnosis of breast masses using quantified BI-RADS findings. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 111: 84–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Giger M L 2000 Computer-aided diagnosis of breast lesions in medical images. Computing in Medicine 58: 39–45

    Google Scholar 

  73. Lo C M, Chang Y C, Yang Y W, Huang C S and Chang R F 2015 Quantitative breast mass classification based on the integration of B-mode features and strain features in elastography. Computers in Biology and Medicine 64: 91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Moon W K, Lo C M, Chang J M, Huang C S, Chen J H, and Chang R F 2013 Quantitative Ultrasound Analysis for Classification of BI-RADS Category 3 Breast Masses. Journal of Digital Imaging 26: 1091–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Miranda G H B and Felipe J C 2015 Computer-aided diagnosis system based on fuzzy logic for breast cancer categorization. Computers in Biology and Medicine 64: 334–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. You H, Ma Z, Tang Y, Wang Y, Yan J, Cen K, Ni M and Huang Q 2017 Comparison of ANN (MLP), ANFIS, SVM, and RF models for the online classification of heating value of burning municipal solid waste in circulating fluidized bed incinerators. Waste Management 68: 186–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Mousa R, Munib Q and Moussa A 2005 Breast cancer diagnosis system based on wavelet analysis and fuzzy-neural. Expert Systems with Applications 28: 713–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Iraji M S 2017 Multi-layer architecture for adaptive fuzzy inference system with a large number of input features. Cognitive Systems Research 42: 23–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Mendel J M 2013 On KM algorithms for solving type-2 fuzzy set problems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 21: 426–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Wu D and Mendel J M 2014 Designing practical interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems made simple. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), 6–11 July 2014, Beijing, China, pp. 800–807

  81. Chumklin S, Auephanwiriyakul S and Umpon N T 2010 Microcalcification detection in mammograms using interval type-2 fuzzy logic system with automatic membership function generation. In: Proceedings of Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ), 2010 IEEE International Conference, 18–23 July 2010, Barcelona, Spain

  82. Treesatayapun C and Uatrongjit S 2005 Adaptive controller with fuzzy rules emulated structure and its applications. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 18: 603–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Nozohour-Leilabady B N and Fazelabdolabadi B 2016 On the application of artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm for optimization of well placements in fractured reservoirs; efficiency comparison with the particle swarm optimization (PSO) methodology. Petroleum 2: 79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Lin C, Hou Y, Chen T and Chen K 2014 Breast nodules computer-aided diagnostic system design using fuzzy cerebellar model neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22: 693–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is supported by Erciyes University Scientific Research Projects unit with the ID of 6629. The authors are gratefull to Dr T S A Geertsma for supplying the ultrasound image database and Dr Bilge Oztoprak (Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Medicine, Radiology Department) for commenting on ultrasound images medically.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kayseri Vocational College, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey

    ESMA UZUNHISARCIKLI

  2. Kangal Vocational College, Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey

    VOLKAN GOREKE

Authors
  1. ESMA UZUNHISARCIKLI
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. VOLKAN GOREKE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ESMA UZUNHISARCIKLI.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

UZUNHISARCIKLI, E., GOREKE, V. A novel classifier model for mass classification using BI-RADS category in ultrasound images based on Type-2 fuzzy inference system. Sādhanā 43, 138 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-018-0915-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-018-0915-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation