Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Classification of Benign and Malignant Breast Masses on Mammograms for Large Datasets using Core Vector Machines

Author(s): Jebasonia Jebamony and Dheeba Jacob*

Volume 16, Issue 6, 2020

Page: [703 - 710] Pages: 8

DOI: 10.2174/1573405615666190801121506

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer is one of the most leading causes of cancer deaths among women. Early detection of cancer increases the survival rate of the affected women. Machine learning approaches that are used for classification of breast cancer usually takes a lot of processing time during the training process. This paper attempts to propose a Machine Learning approach for breast cancer detection in mammograms, which does not depend on the number of training samples.

Objectives: The paper aims to develop a core vector machine-based diagnosis system for breast cancer detection using the date from MIAS. The main motivation behind using this system is to reduce the computational and memory requirement for large training data and to improve the classification accuracy.

Methods: The proposed method has four stages: 1) Pre-processing is done to extract the breast region using global thresholding and enhancement using histogram equalization; 2) identification of potential mass using Otsu thresholding; 3) feature extraction using Laws Texture energy measures; and 4) mass detection is done using Core vector machine (CVM) classifier.

Results: Comparative analysis was done with different existing algorithms: Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Fuzzy Support Vector Machines (FSVM). The results illustrate that the proposed Core Vector Machine (CVM) classifier produced a promising result in terms of sensitivity (96.9%), misclassification rate (0.0443) and accuracy (95.89%). The time taken for training process is 0.0443, which is less when compared with other machine learning algorithms.

Conclusion: Performance analysis shows that CVM classifier is superior to other classifiers like ANN, SVM and FSVM. The computational time of the CVM classifier during the training process was also analysed and found to be better than other discussed algorithms. The results achieved show that CVM classifier is the best algorithm for breast mass detection in mammograms.

Keywords: Breast cancer, computer aided diagnosis, core vector machine, laws, mammograms, ANN.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Balleyguier C, Boyer B, Athanasiou A, Vanel D, Sigal R. [Understanding CAD (computer-aided diagnosis) in mammography]. J Radiol 2005; 86(1): 29-35.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0221-0363(05)81319-8] [PMID: 15785414]
[2]
Malvia S, Bagadi SA, Dubey US, Saxena S. Epidemiology of breast cancer in Indian women. Asia-Pacific J Clin OncolPubl 2017; 2017: 9.
[3]
Ng KH, Muttarak M. Advances in mammography have improved early detection of breast cancer. J-Hong Kong Coll Radiol 2003; 6: 126-31.
[4]
Timp S, Karssemeijer N. A new 2D segmentation method based on dynamic programming applied to computer aided detection in mammography. Med Phys 2004; 31(5): 958-71.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.1688039] [PMID: 15191279]
[5]
Kooi T, Litjens G, van Ginneken B, et al. Large scale deep learning for computer aided detection of mammographic lesions. Med Image Anal 2017; 35: 303-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.07.007] [PMID: 27497072]
[6]
Yang Z, Dong M, Guo Y, et al. A new method of micro-calcifications detection in digitized mammograms based on improved simplified PCNN. Neurocomputing 2016; 218: 79-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2016.08.068]
[7]
Ferlay J, Shin H-R, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127(12): 2893-917.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25516] [PMID: 21351269]
[8]
Hu K, Yang W, Gao X. Microcalcification diagnosis in digital mammography using extreme learning machine based on hidden Markov tree model of dual-tree complex wavelet transform. Expert Syst Appl 2017; 86: 135-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.05.062]
[9]
Peng W, Mayorga RV, Hussein EMA. An automated confirmatory system for analysis of mammograms. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2016; 125: 134-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2015.09.019] [PMID: 26742491]
[10]
Li Y, Chen H, Wei X, Peng Y, Cheng L. Mass classification in mammograms based on two-concentric masks and discriminating texton. Pattern Recognit 2016; 60: 648-56.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2016.06.021]
[11]
de Bruijne M. Machine learning approaches in medical image analysis: From detection to diagnosis. Med Image Anal 2016; 33: 94-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.032] [PMID: 27481324]
[12]
Swiderski B, Osowski S, Kurek J, et al. Novel methods of image description and ensemble of classifiers in application to mammogram analysis. Expert Syst Appl 2017; 81: 67-78.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.03.031]
[13]
Dhungel N, Carneiro G, Bradley AP. A deep learning approach for the analysis of masses in mammograms with minimal user intervention. Med Image Anal 2017; 37: 114-28.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2017.01.009] [PMID: 28171807]
[14]
Dhahbi S, Barhoumi W, Zagrouba E. Breast cancer diagnosis in digitized mammograms using curvelet moments. Comput Biol Med 2015; 64: 79-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2015.06.012] [PMID: 26151831]
[15]
Hu K, 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.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2010.2051060]
[16]
Suckling J, Parker J, Dance D, et al. The mammographic image analysis society digital mammogram database. Exerpta Medica Inter Congress Series 1994; 1069: 375-8.
[17]
Wang D, Zhang B, Zhang P, Qiao H. An online core vector machine with adaptive MEB adjustment. Pattern Recognit 2010; 43(10): 3468-82.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2010.05.020]
[18]
Chang L. The geometric relationship between core vector machine and support vector machine In: 7th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation. Chongqing, China: IEEE 2008; pp. 4439-3.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WCICA.2008.4593638]
[19]
Zuiderveld K. Contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization. Graph Gems 1994; 1994: 474-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-336156-1.50061-6]
[20]
Abera KA, Manahiloh KN, Nejad MM. The effectiveness of global thresholding techniques in segmenting two-phase porous media. Constr Build Mater 2017; 142: 256-67.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.046]
[21]
Medina-Carnicer R, Madrid-Cuevas FJ, Fernández-Garcia NL, Carmona-Poyato A. Evaluation of global thresholding techniques in non-contextual edge detection. Pattern Recognit Lett 2005; 26(10): 1423-34.
[22]
Otsu N. A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 1979; 9(1): 62-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076]
[23]
Laws KI. Texture energy measures. In: Proceedings of the Image Understanding Workshop. 1979; pp. 47-51.
[24]
Tsang IW, Kwok JT, Cheung P-M. Core vector machines: Fast SVM training on very large data sets. J Mach Learn Res 2005; 6(3): 363-92.
[25]
Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3(1): 32-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3] [PMID: 15405679]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
21
1
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy