Advertisement

False Positive Reduction in Breast Mass Detection Using the Fusion of Texture and Gradient Orientation Features

  • Mariam Busaleh
  • Muhammad HussainEmail author
  • Hatim A. AboalsamhEmail author
  • Mansour Zuair
  • George Bebis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10072)

Abstract

The presence of masses in mammograms is among the main indicators of breast cancer and their diagnosis is a challenging task. The one problem of Computer aided diagnosis (CAD) systems developed to assist radiologists in detecting masses is high false positive rate i.e. normal breast tissues are detected as masses. This problem can be reduced if localised texture and gradient orientation patterns in suspicious Regions Of Interest (ROIs) are captured in a robust way. Discriminative Robust Local Binary Pattern (DRLBP) and Discriminative Robust Local Ternary Pattern (DRLTP) are among the state-of-the-art best texture descriptors whereas Histogram of Oriented Gradient (HOG) is one of the best descriptor for gradient orientation patterns. To capture the discriminative micro-patterns existing in ROIs, we propose localised DRLBP-HOG and DRLTP-HOG descriptors by fusing DRLBP, DRLTP and HOG for the description of ROIs; the localisation is archived by dividing each ROI into a number of blocks (sub-images). Support Vector Machine (SVM) is used to classify mass or normal ROIs. The evaluation on DDSM, a benchmark mammograms database, revealed that localised DRLBP-HOG with 9 (3\(\times \)3) blocks forms the best representation and yields an accuracy of 99.80±0.62(ACC±STD) outperforming the state-of-the-art methods.

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel, R.L., Miller, K.D., Jemal, A.: Cancer statistics, 2016. CA: Cancer J. Clin. 66, 7–30 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hospital, K.F.S., Centre, R.: Breast cancer report, 15 February 2016. https://www.kfshrc.edu.sa/en/home
  3. 3.
    Llad, X., Oliver, A., Freixenet, J., Mart, R., Mart, J.: A textural approach for mass false positive reduction in mammography. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 33(6), 415–422 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hussain, M.: False-positive reduction in mammography using multiscale spatial weber law descriptor and support vector machines. Neural Comput. Appl. 25, 83–93 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Oliveira, F.S.S., de Carvalho Filho, A.O., Silva, A.C., de Paiva, A.C., Gattass, M.: Classification of breast regions as mass and non-mass based on digital mammograms using taxonomic indexes and SVM. Comput. Biol. Med. 57, 42–53 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abdel-Nasser, M., Rashwan, H.A., Puig, D., Moreno, A.: Analysis of tissue abnormality and breast density in mammographic images using a uniform local directional pattern. Expert Syst. Appl. 42, 9499–9511 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khan, S., Hussain, M., Aboalsamh, H., Bebis, G.: A comparison of different gabor feature extraction approaches for mass classification in mammography. Multimedia Tools Appl., 1–25 (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11042-015-3017-3
  8. 8.
    Pomponiu, V., Hariharan, H., Zheng, B., Gur, D.: Improving breast mass detection using histogram of oriented gradients. In: Proceedings of the SPIE 9035, Medical Imaging 2014, Computer-Aided Diagnosis (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ojala, T., Pietikainen, M., Maenpaa, T.: Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 24, 971–987 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Satpathy, A., Jiang, X., Eng, H.L.: LBP-based edge-texture features for object recognition. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23, 1953–1964 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tai, S.C., Chen, Z.S., Tsai, W.T.: An automatic mass detection system in mammograms based on complex texture features. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 18, 618–627 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, X., Zeng, Z.: A new automatic mass detection method for breast cancer with false positive reduction. Neurocomputing 152, 388–402 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khan, S., Hussain, M., Aboalsamh, H., Mathkour, H., Bebis, G., Zakariah, M.: Optimized gabor features for mass classification in mammography. Appl. Soft Comput. 44, 267–280 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, X., Tang, J.: Mass classification in mammograms using selected geometry and texture features, and a new SVM-based feature selection method. IEEE Syst. J. 8, 910–920 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dalal, N., Triggs, B.: Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection. In: 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2005, vol. 1, pp. 886–893 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hussain, M., Wajid, S., Elzaart, A., Berbar, M.: A comparison of SVM kernel functions for breast cancer detection. In: 2011 Eighth International Conference on Computer Graphics, Imaging and Visualization (CGIV), pp. 145–150 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cristianizzi, N., Shawe-Taylor, J.: An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-Based Learning Methods. Cambridge University Press, New York (2000). 204 pagesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tai, S.-C., Chen, Z.S., Tsai, W.T.: An automatic mass detection system in mammograms based on complex texture features. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 18(2), 618–9627 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of NevadaRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations