Mammographic Segmentation and Risk Classification Using a Novel Binary Model Based Bayes Classifier
Clinical research has shown that the sensitivity of mammography is significantly reduced by increased breast density, which can mask some tumours due to dense fibroglandular tissue. In addition, there is a clear correlation between the overall breast density and mammographic risk. We present an automatic mammographic density segmentation approach using a novel binary model based Bayes classifier. The Mammographic Image Analysis Society (MIAS) database was used in a quantitative and qualitative evaluation. Visual assessment on the segmentation results indicated a good and consistent extraction of mammographic density. With respect to mammographic risk classification, substantial agreements were found between the classification results and ground truth provided by expert screening radiologists. Classification accuracies were 85% and 78% in Tabár and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (Birads) categories, respectively; whilst in the corresponding low and high categories, the classification accuracies were 93% and 88% for Tabár and Birads, respectively.
KeywordsMammographic Density Breast Density Binary Model Percentage Mammographic Density Mammographic Image
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Office for National Statistics. Cancer statistics registrations: Registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2007, england. MB1(38) (2010)Google Scholar
- 3.Tabár, L., Tot, T., Dean, P.B.: Breast Cancer: The Art And Science Of Early Detection With Mamography: Perception, Interpretation, Histopatholigic Correlation, 1st edn., December 16. Georg Thieme Verlag (2004)Google Scholar
- 5.Boyd, N.F., Byng, J.W., Jong, R.A., Fishell, E.K., Little, L.E., Miller, A.B., Lockwood, G.A., Tritchler, D.L., Yaffe, M.J.: Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the canadian national breast screening study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 87, 670–675 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System BI-RADS, 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston (2004)Google Scholar
- 8.Aylward, S.R., Hemminger, B.M., Pisano, E.D.: Mixture modeling for digital mammogram display and analysis. In: The 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, pp. 305–312. Kulwer Academic Publishers (1998)Google Scholar
- 10.Selvan, S.E., Xavier, C.C., Karssemeijer, N., Sequeira, J., Cherian, R.A., Dhala, B.Y.: Parameter estimation in stochastic mammogram model by heuristic optimization techniques. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, 685–695 (2006)Google Scholar
- 12.Oliver, A., Freixenet, J., Zwiggelaar, R.: Automatic classification of breast density. In: Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Image Processing, vol. 2, pp. 1258–1261 (2005)Google Scholar
- 13.Zwiggelaar, R., Denton, E.R.E.: Mammographic risk assessment and local greylevel appearance histograms. In: 10th International Conference on Information Technology and Applications in Biomedicine, p. 1 (2010)Google Scholar
- 14.Marias, K., Petroudi, S., English, R., Adams, R., Brady, M.: Subjective and computer-based characterisation ofmammographic patterns. In: The 6th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, pp. 552–556 (2002)Google Scholar
- 15.Petroudi, S., Marias, K., English, R., Brady, M.: Classification of mammogram patterns using area measurements and the standard mammogram form (smf). In: Medical Image Analysis and Understanding, pp. 197–200 (2002)Google Scholar
- 16.Petroudi, S., Kadir, T., Brady, M.: Automatic classification of mammographic parenchymal patterns: A statistical approach. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, vol. 1, pp. 798–801 (2003)Google Scholar
- 18.Suckling, J., Parker, J., Dance, D., Astley, S., Hutt, I., Boggis, C., Ricketts, I., Stamatakis, E., Cerneaz, N., Kok, S., Taylor, P., Betal, D., Savage, J.: The mammographic images analysis society digital mammogram database. In: Dance, Gale, Astley, Gairns (eds.) Excerpta Medica. International Congress Series, vol. 1069, pp. 375–378. Elsevier (1994)Google Scholar