4.6 Article

Computer-aided diagnosis for distinguishing between triple-negative breast cancer and fibroadenomas based on ultrasound texture features

Journal

MEDICAL PHYSICS
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 3024-3035

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1118/1.4921123

Keywords

breast cancer; fibroadenoma; triple-negative breast cancer; gray-scale invariant features; ranklet transform

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), an aggressive subtype, is frequently misclassified as fibroadenoma due to benign morphologic features on breast ultrasound (US). This study aims to develop a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system based on texture features for distinguishing between TNBC and benign fibroadenomas in US images. Methods: US images of 169 pathology-proven tumors (mean size, 1.65 cm; range, 0.7-3.0 cm) composed of 84 benign fibroadenomas and 85 TNBC tumors are used in this study. After a tumor is segmented out using the level-set method, morphological, conventional texture, and multiresolution gray-scale invariant texture feature sets are computed using a best-fitting ellipse, gray-level co-occurrence matrices, and the ranklet transform, respectively. The linear support vector machine with leave-one-out cross-validation schema is used as a classifier, and the diagnostic performance is assessed with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: The Az values of the morphology, conventional texture, and multiresolution gray-scale invariant texture feature sets are 0.8470 [95% confidence intervals (CIs), 0.7826-0.89731, 0.8542 (95% CI, 0.7911-0.9030), and 0.9695 (95% CI, 0.9376-0.9865), respectively. The Az of the CAD system based on the combined feature sets is 0.9702 (95% CI, 0.9334-0.9882). Conclusions: The CAD system based on texture features extracted via the ranklet transform may be useful for improving the ability to discriminate between TNBC and benign fibroadenomas. (C) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available