[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Breast DCE-MRI radiomics: a robust computer-aided system based on reproducible BI-RADS features across the influence of datasets bias and segmentation methods

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

Abstract

Purpose

A highly accurate and robust computer-aided system based on quantitative high-throughput Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) features from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) can drive the success of radiomic applications in breast cancer diagnosis. We aim to build a stable system with highly reproducible radiomics features, which can make diagnostic performance independent of datasets bias and segmentation methods.

Method

We applied a dataset of 267 patients including 136 malignant and 131 benign tumors from two MRI manufacturers, where 211 cases from a Philips system and 55 cases from a GE system. First, manual annotations, 3D-Unet and 2D-Unet were applied as different segmentation methods. Second, we designed and extracted 3172 features from six modalities of DCE-MRI based on BI-RADS. Third, the feature selection was conducted. Between-class distance was utilized to eliminate the effect of dataset bias caused by two machines. Concordance correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient and deviation were employed to evaluate the influence of three segmentation methods. We further eliminated features redundancy using genetic algorithm. Finally, three classifiers including support vector machine (SVM), the bagged trees and K-Nearest Neighbor were evaluated by their performance for diagnosing malignant and benign tumors.

Results

A total of 246 features were preserved to have high stability and reproducibility. The final feature set showed the robust performance under these factors and achieved the area under curve of 0.88, the accuracy of 0.824, the sensitivity of 0.844, the specificity of 0.807 in differentiating benign and malignant tumors with the SVM classifier using manually segmentation results.

Conclusion

The final selected 246 features are reproducible and show little dependence on segmentation methods and data perturbation. The high stability and effectiveness of diagnosis across these factors illustrate that the preserved features can be used for prognostic analysis and help radiologists in the diagnosis of breast cancer.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2018) Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 60(5):277–300

    Google Scholar 

  2. Milosevic M, Jankovic D, Milenkovic A, Stojanov D (2018) Early diagnosis and detection of breast cancer. Technol Health Care 26(4):729–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hara N, Okuizumi M, Koike H, Kawaguchi M, Bilim V (2010) Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) is a useful modality for the precise detection and staging of early prostate cancer. Prostate 62(2):140–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, pp 127–143

  5. Agrawal G, Su MY, Nalcioglu O, Feig SA, Chen JH (2009) Significance of breast lesion descriptors in the ACR BI-RADS MRI lexicon. Cancer 115:1363–1380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Isensee F, Petersen J, Klein A, Zimmerer D, Jaeger PF, Kohl S (2018) Nnu-net: self-adapting framework for u-net-based medical image segmentation

  7. David PM, Rusty OB (2013) Improving cross-device attacks using zero-mean unit-variance normalization. J Cryptogr Eng 3(2):99–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T (2015) U-net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In: International conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, vol 1, pp 234–241

  9. Hu Y, Qiao M, Guo Y, Wang Y, Yu J, Li J, Chang C (2017) Reproducibility of quantitative high-throughput BI-RADS features extracted from ultrasound images of breast cancer. Med Phys 44(7):3676–3685

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. Stud Media Commun (SMC) 3(6):610–621

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chu A, Sehgal CM, Greenleaf JF (1990) Use of gray value distribution of run lengths for texture analysis. Pattern Recognit Lett 11(6):415–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Galloway MM (1975) Texture analysis using gray level run lengths. Comput Graph Image Process 4(2):172–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Thibault G, Fertil B, Navarro C, Pereira S, Cau P, Levy N, Sequeira J, Mari J (2009) Texture indexes and gray level size zone matrix application to cell nuclei classification. In: 10th International conference on pattern recognition and information processing (Atlantic City, New Jersey), pp 140–145

  14. Amadasun M, King R (1989) Textural features corresponding to textural properties. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 19(5):1264–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lin IK (1989) A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45(1):255–268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. McGraw Kenneth O, Wong SP (1996) Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1(1):30–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Qiao M, Hu Y, Guo Y, Wang Y, Yu J (2018) Breast tumor classification based on a computerized breast imaging reporting and data system feature system. J Ultrasound Med 37(2):403–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rebentrost P, Mohseni M, Lloyd S (2013) Quantum support vector machine for big feature and big data classification. Phys Rev Lett 113(13):130503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sexton J, Laake P (2009) Standard errors for bagged and random forest estimators. Comput Stat Data Anal 53(3):801–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Islam MJ, Wu QMJ, Ahmadi M, Sid-Ahmed MA (2010) Investigating the performance of Naive-Bayes classifiers and K-nearest neighbor classifiers. J Converg Inf Technol 5(2):133–137

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 61871135, 81627804 and 81830058) and the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (Grant 18511102901, 18511102904, 17411953400).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yi Guo, Jianrong Xu or Yuanyuan Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were following the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. This study has been approved by the ethics committee of the Renji Hospital.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Qiao, M., Li, C., Suo, S. et al. Breast DCE-MRI radiomics: a robust computer-aided system based on reproducible BI-RADS features across the influence of datasets bias and segmentation methods. Int J CARS 15, 921–930 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-020-02177-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-020-02177-0

Keywords

Navigation