Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging


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

Research Article

Assessment and Classification of Mass Lesions Based on Expert Knowledge Using Mammographic Analysis

Author(s): Afrooz Arzehgar, Mohammad Mahdi Khalilzadeh * and Fatemeh Varshoei

Volume 15, Issue 2, 2019

Page: [199 - 208] Pages: 10

DOI: 10.2174/1573405614666171213161559

Price: $65


Background: Masses are one of the most important indicators of breast cancer in mammograms, and their classification into two groups as benign and malignant is highly necessary. Computer Aided Diagnosis (CADx) helps radiologists enhance the accuracy of their decision. Hence, the system is required to support and assess with radiologist's interaction as an expert.

Methods: In this research, classification of breast masses using mammography in the two main views which include MLO and CC, is evaluated with respect to the shape, texture and asymmetry aspect. Additionally, a method was developed and proposed using the classification of breast tissue density based on the decision tree.

Discussion: This study therefore, aims to provide a method based on the human decision-making model that will help in designing the perfect tool for radiologists, regardless of the complexity of computing, costly procedures and also reducing the diagnosis error.

Conclusion: Results show that the proposed system for entirely fat, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense breast achieved 100, 99, 99 and 98% true malignant rate, respectively with cross-validation procedure.

Keywords: Breast cancer, decision tree, classifier, mammograms, heterogeneously dense, CADx.

Graphical Abstract
Cancer facts & figures 2015. Atlanta: American Cancer society 2015.
Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: Model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151(10): 738-47.
Yang SK, Moon WK, Cho N, et al. Screening mammography-detected cancers: sensitivity of a computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms. Radiology 2007; 244(1): 104-11.
Mencattini A, Salmeri M, Rabottino G, Salicone S. Metrological characterization of a CADx system for the classification of breast masses in mammograms. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 2010; 59(11): 2792-9.
Eltonsy NH, Tourassi GD, Elmaghraby AS. A concentric morphology model for the detection of masses in mammography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2007; 26(06): 880-9.
Méndez AJ, Tahoces PG, Lado MJ, Souto M, Vidal JJ. Computer-aided diagnosis: Automatic detection of malignant masses in digitized mammograms. Med Phys 1998; 25(6): 957-64.
Castia P, Mencattini A, Salmeri M, et al. Contour-independent detection and classification of mammographiclesions. Biomed Signal Process Control 2016; 25: 165-77.
Hadjiiski L, Sahiner B, Chan HP, Petrick N, Helvie MA, Gurcan M. Analysis of temporal changes of mammographic features: Computer-aided classification of malignant and benign breast masses. Med Phys 2001; 28(11): 2309-17.
Tang J, and X. Liu . In: El-Baz, AS Classification of breast mass in mammography with an improved level set segmentation by combining morphological features and texture features. New York: Springer 2011; pp. 119-35.
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.
Li HD, Kallergi M, Clarke LP, Jain VK, Clark RA. Markov randomfield for tumor detection in digital mammography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1995; 14(3): 565-76.
Li HD, Kallergi M, Clarke LP, Jain VK, Clark RA. An Automatic Mass Detection System in Mammograms Based on Complex Texture Features IEEE J Biomed Health Informat 2014; 18(2): 618= 6=27.
Sameti M, Ward RK, Morgan-Parkes J, Palcic B. Image feature extraction in the last screening mammograms prior to detection of breast cancer. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process 2009; 3(1): 46-52.
Podgorelec V, Kokol P, Stiglic B, Rozman I. Decision trees: an overview and their use in medicine. J Med Syst 2002; 26(5): 445-63.
Karahaliou AN, Boniatis IS, Skiadopoulos SG, et al. Breast cancer diagnosis: analyzing texture of tissue surrounding microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2008; 12(6): 731-8.
Nogueira MA, Abreu PH, Martins P, Machado P, Duarte H, Santos J. Image descriptors in radiology images: A systematic review. Artif Intell Rev 2016; 47(4): 531-59.
Suganthi M, Madheswaran M. An improved medical decision support system to identify the breast cancer using mammogram. J Med Syst 2012; 36(1): 79-91.
Jiji GW, Marsilin JR. Automatic diagnose of the stages of breast cancer using intelligent technique. J Inst Eng 2013; 93(4): 209-15.
Asad M, Azeemi NZ, Naqvi SA. Early stage breast cancer detection through mammographic feature analysis. In: 2011 5th international conference on bioinformatics and biomedical engineering 2011; pp. 1-4.
Maglogiannis I, Zafiropoulos E, Anagnostopoulos I. An intelligent system for automated breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis using SVM based classifiers. Appl Intell 2009; 30(1): 24-36.
Timp S, Varela C, Karssemeijer N. Temporal change analysis for characterization of mass lesions in mammography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2007; 26(7): 945-53.
Liu X, Tang J. Mass classification in mammograms using selected geometry and texture features, and a new SVM-based feature selection method. Sys J IEEE 2014; 8(3): 910-20.
Liu X, Zeng Z. A new automatic mass detection method for breast cancer with false positive reduction. Neurocomputing 2014; 152(25): 388-402.
Sheshadri H, Kandaswamy A. Experimental investigation on breast tissue classification based on statistical feature extraction of mammograms. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2007; 31(1): 46-8.
Soltanian-Zadeh H, Rafiee-Rad F, Pourabdollah-Nejad SD. Comparison of multiwavelet, wavelet, haralick, and shape features for microcalcification classification in mammograms. Patt Recogn 2004; 37(10): 1973-86.
Eltoukhy M, Faye I, Samir B. A comparison of wavelet and curvelet for breast cancer diagnosis in digital mammogram. Comput Biol Med 2010; 40(4): 384-91.
Mikolajczyk K, Schmid C. A performance evaluation of local descriptors. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2005; 27(10): 1615-30.
Agostini V, Delsanto S, Knaflitz M, Molinari F. Noise estimation in infrared image sequences: a tool for the quantitative evaluation of the effectiveness of registration algorithms. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2008; 55(7): 1917-20.
Grim J, Somol P, Haindl M, Danes J. Computer-aided evaluation of screening mammograms based on local texture models. IEEE Trans Image Process 2009; 18(4): 765-73.
Gonzalez RC, Woods RE. Digital image processing. 2nd Edition. Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River; New Jersey 2002.
Scutt D, Manning JT, Whitehouse GH, Leinster SJ, Massey CP. The relationship between breast asymmetry, breast size and the occurrence of breast cancer. Br J Radiol 1997; 70(838): 1017-21.
Youk JH, Kim E-K, Ko KH, Kim MJ. Asymmetric mammographic findings based on the fourth edition of BI-RADS: Types, evaluation, and management. Radiographics 2009; 29(1). Aavialble from:
Ericeira DR, Silva AC, de Paiva AC, Gattass M. Detection of masses based on asymmetric regions of digital bilateral mammograms using spatial description with variogram and cross-variogram functions. Comput Biol Med 2013; 43(8): 987-99.
Wu YT, Wei J, Hadjiiski LM, et al. Bilateral analysis based false positive reduction for computer-aided mass detection. Med Phys 2007; 34(8): 3334-44.
Casti P, Mencattini A, Salmeri M, et al. Towards localization of malignant sites of asymmetry across bilateral mammograms. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2017; 140: 11-7.
Casti P, Mencattini A, Salmeri M, Rangayyan R. Analysis of structural similarity in mammograms for detection of bilateral asymmetry. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2015; 34(2): 662-71.
Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J. An introduction to support vector machines. Cambridge: Cambridge university press 2000.
Moreira IC, Amaral I, Domingues I, Cardoso A, Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS. INbreast: toward a full-field digital mammographic database. Acad Radiol 2011; 19(2): 236-48.

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy