Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automatic mass detection in mammography images using particle swarm optimization and functional diversity indexes

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a computational method to assist in detection of masses in dense and non-dense breasts on mammography images. The proposed methodology is divided into six steps. In summary, the first step consist of the images acquisition that was obtained from the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (DDSM). In the second step, a preprocessing is performed in order to remove noises and enhance the images. In the third step, the segmentation is performed to find the regions of interest (ROIs) that are candidates for masses using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). The fourth step consists in the first false positives reduction based on reduction by distance and Graph Clustering. The fifth step is the second false positive reduction based on texture features using functional diversity indexes. Finally, in the sixth step, the support vector machine (SVM) is used to classify ROIs in whether mass or non-mass. The best results were found in case of dense breast tissue, resulting in a sensitivity of 97.52%, specificity of 92.28%, accuracy of 94.82%, false positives rate per image of 0.38 and free-curve receiver operating characteristic of 0.98.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bose JSC, Karnan M, Sivakumar R (2010) Detection of masses in digital mammograms. Int J Comput Netw Secur 2(2):78

    Google Scholar 

  2. Boyle P, Levin B et al (2008) World cancer report 2008. IARC Press International Agency for Research on Cancer

  3. Braz JG (2014) Detecção de regiões de massas em mamografias usando índices de diversidade, geoestatística e geometria côncava. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade Federal do maranhão, Programa de pós-graduação em Engenharia de Eletricidade são Luis - MA

  4. Chawla NV, Bowyer K, Hall LO, Kegelmeyer WP (2002) Smote: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Journal of artificial intelligence research pp 321–357

  5. Dong M, Lu X, Ma Y, Guo Y, Ma Y, Wang K (2015) An efficient approach for automated mass segmentation and classification in mammograms. Journal of digital imaging pp 1–13

  6. Eleyan A, Demirel H (2011) Co-occurrence matrix and its statistical features as a new approach for face recognition. Turk J Electr Eng Comput Sci 19(1):97–107

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gao X, Wang Y, Li X, Tao D (2010) On combining morphological component analysis and concentric morphology model for mammographic mass detection. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 14(2):266–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Giger ML (2000) Computer-aided diagnosis of breast lesions in medical images. Comput Sci Eng 2(5):39–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gonzales R, Woods R (2010) Processamento Digital de Imagens. 3a. ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, São Paulo

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2007) Digital image processing. 3a ed. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  11. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K et al (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics (6) pp 610–621

  12. Heath M, Bowyer K, Kopans D, Moore R, Kegelmeyer P (2000) The digital database for screening mammography. In: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on digital mammography, pp. 212–218. Citeseer

  13. Hu K, Gao X, Li F (2011) Detection of suspicious lesions by adaptive thresholding based on multiresolution analysis in mammograms. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 60(2):462–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. INCA dSJAG (2015) Instituto Nacional de câncer josé Alencar Gomes da Silva. Disponível em: Acessado em: 05/11/2015. www2.inca.gov.br

  15. INCA INdC (2014) Estimativas de incidência de câncer no brasil. rio de janeiro 2014

  16. Ke L, Mu NKY (2010) Mass computer-aided diagnosis method in mammogram based on texture features. In: IEEE. 3Rd international conference on biomedical engineering and informatics (BMEI). yantai, China, 2010. pp. v. 1, p. 354–357

  17. Kennedy J (2010) Particle swarm optimization. In: Encyclopedia of machine learning, pp 760–766. Springer

  18. Liu X, Xu X, Liu J, Feng Z (2011) A new automatic method for mass detection in mammography with false positives reduction by supported vector machine. In: Biomedical engineering and informatics (BMEI), 2011 4th international conference on, vol. 1, pp 33–37. IEEE

  19. Mcpherson K, Steel C, Dixon J (2000) Breast cancer—epidemiology, risk factors, and genetics. Bmj 321(7261):624–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Merwe DVD, Engelbrecht AP (2003) Data clustering using particle swarm optimization. In: Evolutionary computation, 2003. CEC’03. The 2003 congress on, vol. 1, pp 215–220. IEEE

  21. Otsu N (1975) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. Automatica 11(285-296):23–27

    Google Scholar 

  22. Petch EYOL, Gaston KJ (2006) Functional diversity: back to basics and looking forward. Ecol Lett 9(6):741–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Qian W, Song D, Lei MRS, Eikman E (2007) Computeraided mass detection based on ipsilateral multiview mammograms. Acad Radiol 14(5):530–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sampaio WB, Diniz EM, Silva AC, DE Paiva AC, Gattass M (2011) Detection of masses in mammogram images using cnn, geostatistic functions and svm. Comput Biol Med 41(8):653–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sampaio WBd, Silva AC, DE Paiva AC, Gattass M (2015) Detection of masses in mammograms with adaption to breast density using genetic algorithm, phylogenetic trees, lbp and svm. Expert Syst Appl 42(22):8911–8928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Schaeffer SE (2007) Graph clustering. Comput Sci Rev 1(1):27–64. doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2007.05.001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Society AAC (2013) Learn about breast cancer

  28. Tilman D (2001) Functional diversity. Enc Biodiversity 3(1):109–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tzikopoulos S, Mavroforakis M, Georgiou H, Dimitropoulos N, Theodoridis S (2011) A fully automated scheme for mammographic segmentation and classification based on breast density and asymmetry. Acad Radiol Elsevier 102(1):47–63

    Google Scholar 

  30. van Engeland S, Karssemeijer N (2007) Combining two mammographic projections in a computer aided mass detection method. Med Phys 34(3):898–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang X, Li L, Xu W, Liu W, Lederman D, Zheng B (2012) Improving performance of computer-aided detection of masses by incorporating bilateral mammographic density asymmetry: an assessment. Comput Methods Prog Biomed Elsevier 19(3):303–310

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wei J, Chan H, Zhou C, Wu Y, Sahiner B, Hadjiiski L, Roubidoux MA, Helvie MA (2011) Computer-aided detection of breast masses: Four-view strategy for screening mammography. Med Phys 38:1867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wu Y, Wei J, Hadjiiski L, Sahiner B, Zhou C, Ge J, Shi J, Zhang Y, Chan H (2007) Bilateral analysis based false positive reduction for computer-aided mass detection. Med Phys NIH Public Access 34(8):3334

    Google Scholar 

  34. Zuiderveld K (1994) Contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization. In: Graphics gems IV, pp 474–485. Academic Press Professional, Inc

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Federal Institute of Piauí (IFPI), Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and the Foundation for the Protection of Research and Scientific, Technological Development of the State of Maranhão (FAPEMA) for financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Federal Institute of Piauí, Teresina, Brazil

    Otilio Paulo S. Neto

  2. Federal University of Maranhão, São Luis, Brazil

    Otilio Paulo S. Neto, Aristófanes C. Silva & Anselmo C. Paiva

  3. Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Marcelo Gattass

Authors
  1. Otilio Paulo S. Neto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aristófanes C. Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anselmo C. Paiva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marcelo Gattass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Otilio Paulo S. Neto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neto, O.P.S., Silva, A.C., Paiva, A.C. et al. Automatic mass detection in mammography images using particle swarm optimization and functional diversity indexes. Multimed Tools Appl 76, 19263–19289 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-4710-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-4710-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation