Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Measures of divergence of oriented patterns for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose We propose a method for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval-cancer cases based on the expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in mammograms.

Methods The expected orientation of the breast tissue at each pixel was derived by using automatically detected landmarks including the breast boundary, the nipple, and the pectoral muscle (in mediolateral-oblique views). We hypothesize that the presence of architectural distortion changes the normal expected orientation of breast tissue patterns in a mammographic image. The angular deviation of the oriented structures in a given mammogram as compared to the expected orientation was analyzed to detect potential sites of architectural distortion using a measure of divergence of oriented patterns. Each potential site of architectural distortion was then characterized using measures of spicularity and angular dispersion specifically designed to represent spiculating patterns. The novel features for the characterization of spiculating patterns include an index of divergence of spicules computed from the intensity image and Gabor magnitude response using the Gabor angle response; radially weighted difference and angle-weighted difference (AWD) measures of the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response; and AWD in the entropy of spicules computed from the intensity, Gabor magnitude, and Gabor angle response.

Results Using the newly proposed features with a database of 106 prior mammograms of 56 interval-cancer cases and 52 mammograms of 13 normal cases, through feature selection and pattern classification with an artificial neural network, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 was obtained. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated a sensitivity of 0.80 at 5.3 false positives (FPs) per patient. Combining the features proposed in the present paper with others described in our previous works led to significant improvement with a sensitivity of 0.80 at 3.7 FPs per patient.

Conclusion The proposed methods can detect architectural distortion in prior mammograms taken 15 months (on the average) before clinical diagnosis of breast cancer, but the FP rate needs to be reduced.

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

Access this article

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (CDC). Cancer among women, May 2011. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/women.htm. Last accessed 21 March 2012

  2. Tang J, Rangayyan RM, Xu J, Naqa IE, Yang Y (2009) Computer-aided detection and diagnosis of breast cancer with mammography: recent advances. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 13(2):236–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. van Dijck JAAM, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R (1993) The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program. Cancer 72(6):1933–1938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rangayyan RM, Prajna S, Ayres FJ, Desautels JEL (2008) Detection of architectural distortion in mammograms acquired prior to the detection of breast cancer using Gabor filters, phase portraits, fractal dimension, and texture analysis. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2(6):347–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Homer MJ (1997) Mammographic interpretation: a practical approach, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. Knutzen AM, Gisvold JJ (1993) Likelihood of malignant disease for various categories of mammographically detected, nonpalpable breast lesions. Mayo Clin Proc 68:454–460

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsubara T, Ichikawa T, Hara T, Fujita H, Kasai S, Endo T, Iwase T (2004) Novel method for detecting mammographic architectural distortion based on concentration of mammary gland. In: Proceedings of the 18th international congress and exhibition on computer assisted radiology and surgery (CARS2004), vol 1268. International Congress Series, Elsevier, pp 867–871

  8. Sameti M, Ward RK, Morgan-Parkes J, Palcic B (2009) Image feature extraction in the last screening mammograms prior to detection of breast cancer. IEEE J Select Topics Signal Process 3(1):46–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Banik S, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL (2011) Detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imag 30(2):279–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Broeders MJM, Onland-Moret NC, Rijken HJTM, Hendriks JHCL, Verbeek ALM, Holland R (2003) Use of previous screening mammograms to identify features indicating cases that would have a possible gain in prognosis following earlier detection. Eur J Cancer 39:1770–1775

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Doi K (2006) Diagnostic imaging over the last 50 years: research and development in medical imaging science and technology. Phys Med Biol 51:R5–R27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rangayyan RM (2005) Biomedical image analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  13. Baker JA, Rosen EL, Lo JY, Gimenez EI, Walsh R, Soo MS (2003) Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. Am J Roentgenol 181:1083–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Karssemeijer N, te Brake GM (1996) Detection of stellate distortions in mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imag 15(5):611–619

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hara T, Makita T, Matsubara T, Fujita H, Inenaga Y, Endo T, Iwase T (2006) Automated detection method for architectural distortion with spiculation based on distribution assessment of mammary gland on mammogram. In: Astley SM, Brady M, Rose C, Zwiggelaar R (eds) Digital mammography/IWDM, Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4046. Manchester, pp 370–375

  16. Ichikawa T, Matsubara T, Hara T, Fujita H, Endo T, Iwase T (2004) Automated detection method for architectural distortion areas on mammograms based on morphological processing and surface analysis. In: Fitzpatrick JM, Sonka M (eds) Proceedings of SPIE medical imaging 2004: image processing. SPIE, San Diego, pp 920–925

  17. Guo Q, Shao J, Ruiz VF (2009) Characterization and classification of tumor lesions using computerized fractal-based texture analysis and support vector machines in digital mammograms. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 4(1):11–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tourassi GD, Delong DM, Floyd CE Jr (2006) A study on the computerized fractal analysis of architectural distortion in screening mammograms. Phys Med Biol 51(5):1299–1312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nakayama R, Watanabe R, Kawamura T, Takada T, Yamamoto K, Takeda K (2008) Computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of architectural distortion on mammograms using multiresolution analysis. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international congress and exhibition on computer assisted radiology and surgery (CARS 2008) vol 3, no 1. Barcelona, pp S418–S419

  20. Nemoto M, Honmura S, Shimizu A, Furukawa D, Kobatake H, Nawano S (2009) A pilot study of architectural distortion detection in mammograms based on characteristics of line shadows. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 4(1):27–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rangayyan RM, Ayres FJ (2006) Gabor filters and phase portraits for the detection of architectural distortion in mammograms. Med Biol Eng Comput 44:883–894

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Minavathi, Murali S, Dinesh MS (2011) Model based approach for detection of architectural distortions and spiculated masses in mammograms. Int J Comput Sci Eng 3(11):3534–3546

  23. Banik S, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL (2012) Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg, online 30

  24. Rangayyan RM, Banik S, Desautels JEL (2010) Computer-aided detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval cancer. J Digit Imag 23(5):611–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sampat MP, Whitman GL, Markey MK, Bovik AC (April 2005) Evidence based detection of spiculated masses and architectural distortion. In: Fitzpatrick JM, Reinhardt JM (eds) Proceedings of SPIE medical imaging 2005: image processing, vol 5747. San Diego, pp 26–37

  26. Matsubara T, Hara T, Fujita H, Endo T, Iwase T (2008) Automated detection method for mammographic spiculated architectural distortion based on surface analysis. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international congress and exhibition on computer assisted radiology and surgery (CARS2008), vol 3, no 1. Barcelona, pp S176–S177

  27. American College of Radiology (ACR) (1998) Illustrated breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS\(^{\rm TM}\)), 3rd edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

  28. Brandt SS, Karemore G, Karssemeijer N, Nielsen M (2011) An anatomically oriented breast coordinate system for mammogram analysis. IEEE Trans Med Imag 30(10):1841–1851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rangayyan RM, Chakraborty J, Banik S, Mukhopadhyay S, Desautels JEL (2012) Detection of architectural distortion using coherence in relation to the expected orientation of breast tissue. In: Proceedings of the 25th international symposium on computer-based medical systems, Rome, pp 1–4

  30. Rangayyan RM, Banik S, Desautels JEL (2012) Detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms using measures of angular dispersion. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE international symposium on medical measurements and applications (MeMeA), Budapest, pp 87–90

  31. Alto H, Rangayyan RM, Paranjape RB, Desautels JEL, Bryant H (2003) An indexed atlas of digital mammograms for computer-aided diagnosis of breast cancer. Ann Telecommun 58(5–6):820–835

    Google Scholar 

  32. Alberta Cancer Board (2004) www.cancerboard.ab.ca/screentest, Alberta. Screen Test: Alberta Program for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer—2001/03 biennial report

  33. Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2002) Digital image processing, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  34. Chakraborty J, Mukhopadhyay S, Singla V, Khandelwal N, Bhattacharyya P (2012) Automatic detection of pectoral muscle using average gradient and shape based feature. J Digit Imag 25(3):387–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kinoshita SK, Azevedo-Marques PM, Pereira RR Jr, Rodrigues JAH, Rangayyan RM (2008) Radon-domain detection of the nipple and the pectoral muscle in mammograms. J Digit Imag 21(1):37–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sickles EA (1986) Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. Am J Roentgenol 146(4):661–663

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Shaw De Paredes E (2007) Atlas of mammography. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rao AR (1990) A taxonomy for texture description and identification. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Rao AR, Jain RC (1992) Computerized flow field analysis: oriented texture fields. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 14(7):693–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Khademi A, Hosseinzadeh D, Venetsanopoulos A, Moody A (2009) Nonparametric statistical tests for exploration of correlation and nonstationarity in images. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on digital signal processing, Santorini-Hellas, pp 1–6

  41. Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res 27(2):209–220

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. ROCKIT. Kurt Rossmann Laboratories for Radiologic Image Research. ROC software. http://www-radiology.uchicago.edu/krl/roc_soft6.htm. Accessed 15 March 2012

  43. Chakraborty DP (2008) Validation and statistical power comparison of methods for analyzing free-response observer performance studies. Acad Radiol 15(12):1554–1566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Chakraborty DP (2006) Analysis of location specific observer performance data: validated extensions of the jackknife free-response (JAFROC) method. Acad Radiol 13(10):1187–1193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ramsey FL, Schafer DW (1997) The statistical sleuth: a course in methods of data analysis. Duxbury Press, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ververidis D, Kotropoulos C (2008) Fast and accurate sequential floating forward feature selection with the Bayes classifier applied to speech emotion recognition. Elsevier Signal Process 88(12):2956–2970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. MATLAB statistics toolbox, mathworks. Available online. http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/stats/

  48. Draper NR, Smith H (1998) Applied regression analysis. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  49. Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2001) Pattern classification, 2nd edn. Wiley-Interscience, New York

    Google Scholar 

  50. Haykin S (1999) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  51. Chakraborty J, Rangayyan RM, Banik S, Mukhopadhyay S, Desautels JEL (2012) Detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms using statistical measures of orientation of texture. In: van Ginneken B, Novak CL (eds) Proceedings of SPIE medical imaging 2012: computer aided diagnosis, vol 8315. San Diego, pp 831521: 1–8

  52. Rangayyan RM, Banik S, Desautels JEL (2012) Statistical measures of correlation and stationarity for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval-cancer cases. In: Proceedings of the 26th international congress and exhibition: computer assisted radiology and surgery, Pisa, Int J CARS vol 7 (suppl 1) pp 251–252

  53. MATLAB. http://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab/

  54. Heath M, Bowyer K, Kopans D, Moore R, Kegelmeyer WP (2001) The digital database for screening mammography. In: Yaffe MJ (ed) Proceedings of the fifth international workshop on digital mammography, Medical Physics Publishing, pp 212–218

  55. Suckling J, Parker J, Dance DR, Astley S, Hutt I, Boggis CRM, Ricketts I, Stamakis E, Cerneaz N, Kok S-L, Taylor P, Betal D, Savage J (1994) The mammographic image analysis society digital mammogram database. In: Gale AG, Astley SM, Dance DD, Cairns AY (eds) Digital mammography: proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on digital mammography, Elsevier, New York, pp 375–378

  56. Burhenne LJW, Wood SA, D’Orsi CJ, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O’Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA, Tabar L, Vyborny CJ, Castellino RA (2000) Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 215(2):554–562

    Google Scholar 

  57. Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, O’Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA (2001) Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology 219(1):192–202

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Samuelson FW, Petrick N, Paquerault S (2007) Advantages and examples of resampling for CAD evaluation. In: 4th IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro (ISBI 2007), Arlington, pp 492–495

  59. Obuchowski NA (1997) Nonparametric analysis of clustered ROC curve data. Biometrics 53(2):567–578

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the grants from the Collaborative Research and Training Experience Programme (CREATE) and a Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada, the University International Grants Committee of the University of Calgary, the Shastri Indo-Canadian Institute, and the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India. We thank Dr. D. P. Chakraborty, University of Pittsburgh, for providing the JAFROC software package and for his assistance with the same.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rangaraj M. Rangayyan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rangayyan, R.M., Banik, S., Chakraborty, J. et al. Measures of divergence of oriented patterns for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. Int J CARS 8, 527–545 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0793-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0793-3

Keywords

Navigation