Skip to main content

Detection of Microcalcification Clusters in Mammograms Using a Difference of Optimized Gaussian Filters

  • Conference paper
Image Analysis and Recognition (ICIAR 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNIP,volume 3656))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Since microcalcification clusters are primary indicators of malignant types of breast cancer, its detection is important to prevent and treat the disease. This paper proposes a method for detection of microcalcification clusters in mammograms using sequential Difference of Gaussian filters (DoG). In a first stage, fifteen DoG filters are applied sequentially to extract the potential regions, and later, these regions are classified using the following features: absolute contrast, standard deviation of the gray level of the microcalcification and a moment of contour sequence (asymmetry coefficient). Once the microcalcifications are detected, two approaches for clustering are compared. In the first one, several microcalcification clusters are detected in each mammogram. In the other, all microcalcifications are considered in a single cluster. We demonstrate that the diagnosis based on the detection of several microcalcification clusters in a mammogram is more efficient than considering a single cluster including all the microcalcifications in the image.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aghdasi, F., Ward, R.K., Palcic, B.: Classification of mammographic microcalcifications clusters. In: Proc. of the CCECE, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp. 1196–1199 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anttinen, I., Pamilo, M., Soiva, M., Roiha, M.: Double reading of mammography screening films: one radiologist or two? Clin. Radiol 48, 414–421 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chandrasekhar, R., Attikiouzel, Y.: Digitization regime as a cause for variation in algorithm performance across two mammogram databases. Technical Report 99/05, Centre for Intelligent Information Processing Systems, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, The University of Western Australia (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dengler, J., Behrens, S., Desaga, J.F.: Segmentation of microcalcifications in mammograms. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 12(4), 634–642 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ganott, M.A., Harris, K.M., Klaman, H.M., Keeling, T.L.: Analysis of false-negative cancer cases identified with a mammography audit. The Breast Journal 5(3), 166–175 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gulsrud, T.O.: Analysis of mammographic microcalcifications using a computationally efficient filter bank. Technical Report, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Stavanger University College (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hong, B.-W., Brady, M.: Segmentation of mammograms in topographic approach. In: IEE International Conference on Visual Information Engineering, Guildford, UK (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kozlov, A., Koller, D.: Nonuniform dynamic discretization in hybrid networks. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of Uncertainty in AI (UAI), Providence, Rhode Island, pp. 314–325 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kurkova, V.: Kolmogorov’s theorem. In: Arbib, M.A. (ed.) The handbook of brain theory and neural networks, pp. 501–502. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Li, S., Hara, T., Hatanaka, Y., Fujita, H., Endo, T., Iwase, T.: Performance evaluation of a CAD system for detecting masses on mammograms by using the MIAS database. Medical Imaging and Information Science 18(3), 144–153 (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Ochoa, E.M.: Clustered microcalcification detection using optimized difference of gaussians. Master Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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: Exerpta Medica International Congress Series, vol. 1069, pp. 375–378 (1994), http://www.wiau.man.ac.uk/services/MIAS/MIASweb.html

  13. Thurfjell, E.L., Lernevall, K.A., Taube, A.A.S.: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191, 241–244 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Oporto-Díaz, S., Hernández-Cisneros, R., Terashima-Marín, H. (2005). Detection of Microcalcification Clusters in Mammograms Using a Difference of Optimized Gaussian Filters. In: Kamel, M., Campilho, A. (eds) Image Analysis and Recognition. ICIAR 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3656. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11559573_121

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11559573_121

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29069-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31938-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics