Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Automatic suspicions lesions segmentation based on variable-size windows in mammography images

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Health and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Breast cancer is the second main cause of death in women of western countries, so early detection and prevention is crucial. Early detection increases the likelihood of treatment as well as patient resistance. Among breast cancer detection methods, mammography is the most effective diagnostic method. For radiologists, diagnosing a cancerous mass on mammographic images is prone to error, which shows there is a need for a method to reduce the errors. In this study, a new adaptive thresholding method is proposed based on variable-sized windows. This method estimates the location of the mass and then determines the exact location of the cancerous tissue to reduce false positives. To detect the mass automatically, firstly, the histograms diagram and its relative maximums have been used to calculate the initial threshold for estimating the mass location. Two windows that contain information around each pixel and their size varies according to the mean value of each image due to the preservation of useful information. Secondly, two windows are used for the final threshold in order to discover the location of the mass and its exact shape. The proposed approach has been applied to 170 images of the Mammographic Image Analysis Society MiniMammographic database. Evaluations have shown 96.7% sensitivity and 0.79 false-positive rates, which prove an improvement in comparison with other state-of-the-art methods.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Well-defined/circumscribed masses.

  2. Calcification.

  3. Spiculated masses.

  4. Other, ill-defined masses.

  5. Architectural distortion.

  6. Asymmetry.

  7. Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization.

References

  1. Anitha J, Peter JD, Pandian SI. A dual stage adaptive thresholding dusat for automatic mass detection in mammograms. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2017;138:93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ayres FJ, Rangayvan RM. Characterization of architectural distortion in mammograms. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 2005;24(1):59–67.

  3. Basha SS, Prasad KS. Automatic detection of breast cancer mass in mammograms using morphological operators and fuzzy c–means clustering. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology. 2009;5(6)

  4. Cao A, Song Q, Yang X. Robust information clustering incorporating spatial information for breast mass detection in digitized mammograms. Comput Vis Image Underst. 2008;109(1):86–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Groshong BR, Kegelmeyer WP. Evaluation of a hough transform method for circumscribed lesion detection. Digital mammography. 1996;96:361–6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Guliato D, Rangayyan RM, Carvalho JD, Santiago SA. Polygonal modeling of contours of breast tumors with the preservation of spicules. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2008;55(1):14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kai Hu, Gao X, Li F. Detection of suspicious lesions by adaptive thresholding based on multiresolution analysis in mammograms. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas. 2011;60(2):462–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jalalian A, Mashohor SB, Mahmud HR, Saripan MI, Ramli AR, Karasfi B. Computer aided detection diagnosis of breast cancer in mammography and ultrasound a review. Clin Imaging. 2013;37(3):420–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Karssemeijer N, te Brake GM. Detection of stellate distortions in mammograms. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 1996;15(5):611–9

  10. Kekre HB, Sarode TK, Gharge SM. Tumor detection in mammography images using vector quantization technique. International Journal of Intelligent Information Technology Application. 2009;2(5):237–42.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kobatake H, Murakami M, Takeo H, Nawano S. Computerized detection of malignant tumors on digital mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1999;18(5):369–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kom G, Tiedeu A, Kom M. Automated detection of masses in mammograms by local adaptive thresholding. Comput Biol Med. 2007;37(1):37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kurt B, Nabiyev VV, Turhan K. A novel automatic suspicious mass regions identification using havrda & charvat entropy and otsu’s n thresholding. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;114(3):349–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Li H, Wang Y, Liu KR, Lo SC, Freedman MT. Computerized radiographic mass detection I lesion site selection by morphological enhancement and contextual segmentation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;20(4):289–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mencattini A, Salmeri M, Lojacono R, Frigerio M, Caselli F. Mammographic images enhancement and denoising for breast cancer detection using dyadic wavelet processing. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas. 2008;57(7):1422–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Farzaneh Moradkhani and Bahram Sadeghi Bigham. A new image mining approach for detecting micro-calcification in digital mammograms. Applied Artificial Intelligence. 2017;31(5–6):411–24.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pereira DC, Ramos RP, Nascimento MZD. Segmentation and detection of breast cancer in mammograms combining wavelet analysis and genetic algorithm. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;114(1):88–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wener Borges Sampaio, Edgar Moraes Diniz, Aristófanes Corrêa Silva, Anselmo Cardoso De Paiva, and Marcelo Gattass. Detection of masses in mammogram images using cnn, geostatistic functions and svm. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 2011;41(8):653–64

  19. Singh S, Bovis K. An evaluation of contrast enhancement techniques for mammographic breast masses. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2005;9(1):109–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. John Suckling, J Parker, D Dance, S Astley, I Hutt, C Boggis, I Ricketts, E Stamatakis, N Cerneaz, S Kok, et al. The mammographic image analysis society digital mammogram database. In Exerpta Medica. International Congress Series. 1994;375–8

  21. Vikhe PS, Thool VR. Mass detection in mammographic images using wavelet processing and adaptive threshold technique. J Med Syst. 2016;40(4):82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang M, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Doi K. Mammographic texture analysis for the detection of speculated lesions. Excerpta Medica. 1996;1119:347–51.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang XP, Desai MD. Segmentation of bright targets using wavelets and adaptive thresholding. IEEE Trans Image Process. 2001;10(7):1020–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Xiao-ping Zhang. Multiscale tumor detection and segmentation in mammograms. In Biomedical Imaging, 2002. Proceedings. 2002 IEEE International Symposium. 2002;213–6

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Technology, Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences (IASBS), Zanjan, Iran

    Bahram Sadeghi & Meysam Karimi

  2. Faculty of Business and Information Technology, Ontario Tech University, Oshawa, ON, Canada

    Samaneh Mazaheri

Authors
  1. Bahram Sadeghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meysam Karimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Samaneh Mazaheri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samaneh Mazaheri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sadeghi, B., Karimi, M. & Mazaheri, S. Automatic suspicions lesions segmentation based on variable-size windows in mammography images. Health Technol. 11, 99–110 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-020-00506-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-020-00506-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation