OPTIMAM Image Simulation Toolbox - Recent Developments and Ongoing Studies

  • Premkumar ElangovanEmail author
  • Andria Hadjipanteli
  • Alistair Mackenzie
  • David R. Dance
  • Kenneth C. Young
  • Kevin Wells
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9699)


Virtual clinical trials (VCTs) are increasingly being seen as a viable pre-clinical method for evaluation of imaging systems in breast cancer screening. The CR-UK funded OPTIMAM project is aimed at producing modelling tools for use in such VCTs. In the initial phase of the project, modelling tools were produced to simulate 2D-mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging systems. This paper elaborates on the new tools that have recently been developed for the current phase of the OPTIMAM project. These new additions to the framework include tools for simulating synthetic breast tissue, spiculated masses and variable-angle DBT systems. These tools are described in the paper along with the preliminary validation results. Four-alternative forced choice (4-AFC) type studies deploying these new tools are underway. The results of the ongoing 4AFC studies investigating minimum detectable contrast/size of masses/microcalcifications for different modalities and system designs are presented.


Digital breast tomosynthesis 2D-mammography Modelling Simulation 4AFC Simulated masses Breast phantom 



This work is part of the OPTIMAM2 project funded by Cancer Research UK (grant, number: C30682/A17321). We are grateful for Hologic’s assistance with the reconstruction. The authors thank colleagues at NCCPM, Dr. Vicky Cooke at the Jarvis Breast Screening Centre, Guildford and observers at St Georges Hospital, London for invaluable assistance.


  1. 1.
    Hevie, M.A., Chang, J.T., Hendrick, R.E., Banerjee, M.: Reduction in late-stage breast cancer incidence in the mammography era: implications for overdiagnosis of invasive cancer. Cancer 120, 2649–2656 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elangovan, P., Mackenzie, A., Diaz, O., Rashidnasab, A., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Warren, L.M., Shaheen, E., Bosmans, H., Bakic, P.R., Wells, K.: Development and validation of a modelling framework for simulating 2D-mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Phys. Med. Biol. 59, 4275–4293 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rashidnasab, A., Elangovan, P., Diaz, O., Mackenzie, A., Young, K.C., Dance, D.R., Wells, K.: Simulation of 3D DLA masses in digital breast tomosynthesis. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 8668, p. 86680Y (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rashidnasab, A., Elangovan, P., Yip, M., Young, K.C., Dance, D.R., Wells, K.: Simulation and assessment of realistic breast lesions using fractal growth models. Phys. Med. Biol. 15, 5613–5626 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shaheen, E., De Keyzer, F., Bosmans, H., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Van Ongeval, C.: The simulation of 3D mass models in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Med. Phys. 41, 081913-1-17 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diaz, O., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Elangovan, P., Bakic, P.R., Wells, K.: Estimation of scattered radiation in digital breast tomosynthesis. Phys. Med. Biol. 59, 4375–4390 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mackenzie, A., Dance, D.R., Diaz, O., Young, K.C.: Image simulation and a model of noise power spectra across a range of mammographic beam qualities. Med. Phys. 41, 12901–12914 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elangovan, P., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Wells, K.: Generation of 3D synthetic breast tissue. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 9783, p. 9783081-6 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elangovan, P., Alrehily, F., Pinto, R.F., Rashidnasab, A., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Wells, K.: Simulation of spiculated breast lesions. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 9783, p. 97832E1-5 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elangovan, P., Rashidnasab, A., Mackenzie, A., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Bosmans, H., Segars, W.P., Wells, K.: Performance comparison of breast imaging modalities using a 4AFC human observer study. In: Proceedings of SPIE vol. 9412, p. 94121T1-7 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hadjipanteli, A., Elangovan, P., Looney, P.T., Mackenzie, A., Wells, K., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C.: Detection of microcalcification clusters by 2D-mammography and narrow and wide angle digital breast tomosynthesis. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 9783, p. 9783061-8 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rashidnasab, A., Elangovan, P., Mackenzie, A., Dance, D.R., Young, K.C., Bosmans, H., Wells, K.: Virtual clinical trials using inserted pathology in clinical images: investigation and assumptions for local glandularity and noise. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 9412, p. 94122D1-7 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hill, M.L., Mainprize, J.G., Carton, A.K., Saab-Puong, S., Iordache, R., Muller, S., Jong, R.A., Dromain, C., Yaffe, M.J.: Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part I. Single-energy imaging. Med. Phys. 40, 051910 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cockmartin, L., Bosmans, H., Marshall, N.W.: Comparative power law analysis of structured breast phantom and patient images in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Med. Phys. 40, 081920 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Premkumar Elangovan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andria Hadjipanteli
    • 2
  • Alistair Mackenzie
    • 2
  • David R. Dance
    • 2
    • 3
  • Kenneth C. Young
    • 2
    • 3
  • Kevin Wells
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Vision, Speech and Signal ProcessingUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK
  2. 2.NCCPM, Royal Surrey County HospitalGuildfordUK
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK

Personalised recommendations