More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

An Integrated Approach to Stage 1 Breast Cancer Detection

Authors:

Jeannie M. Fitzgerald,

David Medernach,

Krzysztof KrawiecAuthors Info & Claims

GECCO '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

Pages 1199 - 1206

https://doi.org/10.1145/2739480.2754761

Published: 11 July 2015 Publication History

Abstract

We present an automated, end-to-end approach for Stage~1 breast cancer detection. The first phase of our proposed work-flow takes individual digital mammograms as input and outputs several smaller sub-images from which the background has been removed. Next, we extract a set of features which capture textural information from the segmented images.

In the final phase, the most salient of these features are fed into a Multi-Objective Genetic Programming system which then evolves classifiers capable of identifying those segments which may have suspicious areas that require further investigation.

A key aspect of this work is the examination of several new experimental configurations which focus on textural asymmetry between breasts. The best evolved classifier using such a configuration can deliver results of 100% accuracy on true positives and a false positive per image rating of just 0.33, which is better than the current state of the art.

References

[1]

Arbab Masood Ahmad, Gul Muhammad Khan, Sahibzada Ali Mahmud, and Julian Francis Miller. Breast cancer detection using cartesian genetic programming evolved artificial neural networks. In Terry Soule et al., editors, GECCO '12: Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference, pages 1031--1038, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 7-11 July 2012. ACM.

Digital Library

[2]

Leonard Berlin. Liability of interpreting too many radiographs. American Journal of Roentgenology, 175:17--22, 2000.

[3]

Mythreyi Bhargavan, Jonathan H. Sunshine, and Barbara Schepps. Too few radiologists? American Journal of Roentgenology, 178:1075--1082, 2002.

[4]

Keir Bovis and Sameer Singh. Detection of masses in mammograms using texture features. In Pattern Recognition, 2000. Proceedings. 15th International Conference on, volume 2, pages 267--270. IEEE, 2000.

[5]

Tommy E. Cupples, Joan E. Cunningham, and James C. Reynolds. Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program. American Journal of Roentgenology, 186:944--950, 2005.

[6]

Kalyanmoy Deb, Amrit Pratap, Sameer Agarwal, and TAMT Meyarivan. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Transactions on, 6(2):182--197, 2002.

Digital Library

[7]

Jeannie Fitzgerald and Conor Ryan. Exploring boundaries: optimising individual class boundaries for binary classification problems. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference, GECCO '12, pages 743--750, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.

Digital Library

[8]

Jeannie Fitzgerald and Conor Ryan. A hybrid approach to the problem of class imbalance. In International Conference on Soft Computing, Brno, Czech Republic, June 2013.

[9]

Félix-Antoine Fortin and Marc Parizeau. Revisiting the nsga-ii crowding-distance computation. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO '13, pages 623--630, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM.

Digital Library

[10]

Mark Hall, Eibe Frank, Geoffrey Holmes, Bernhard Pfahringer, Peter Reutemann, and Ian H. Witten. The weka data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., 11(1):10--18, November 2009.

Digital Library

[11]

R. et al Haralick. Texture features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 3(6), 1973.

[12]

Trevor Hastie, Robert Tibshirani and Jerome Friedman. The elements of statistical learning, volume 2. Springer, 2009.

[13]

Michael Heath, Kevin Bowyer, Daniel Kopans, Richard Moore, and W. Philip Kegelmeyer. The digital database for screening mammography. In M.J. Yaffe, editor, Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Digital Mammography, pages 212--218. Medical Physics Publishing, 2001.

[14]

Rolando R Hernández-Cisneros, Hugo Terashima-Marín, and Santiago E Conant-Pablos. Comparison of class separability, forward sequential search and genetic algorithms for feature selection in the classification of individual and clustered microcalcifications in digital mammograms. In Image Analysis and Recognition, pages 911--922. Springer, 2007.

Digital Library

[15]

J. Koza. Genetic programming: A paradigm for genetically breeding populations of computer programs to solve problems. Technical Report STAN-CS-90-1314, Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford University, June 1990.

[16]

Solomon Kullback and Richard A Leibler. On information and sufficiency. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, pages 79--86, 1951.

[17]

W.B. Langdon and A.P. Harrison. Gp on spmd parallel graphics hardware for mega bioinformatics data mining. Soft Computing, 12(12):1169--1183, 2008.

Digital Library

[18]

Huai Li, Yue Wang, KJ Ray Liu, S-CB Lo, and Matthew T Freedman. Computerized radiographic mass detection. i. lesion site selection by morphological enhancement and contextual segmentation. Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on, 20(4):289--301, 2001.

[19]

Simone A. Ludwig and Stefanie Roos. Prognosis of breast cancer using genetic programming. In Rossitza Setchi et al., editors, 14th International Conference on Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems (KES 2010), Part IV, volume 6279 of LNCS, pages 536--545, Cardiff, UK, September 8-10 2010. Springer.

Digital Library

[20]

M Markey M. Sampat and A Bovik. Computer-aided detection and diagnosis in mammography. In Alan C. Bovik, editor, Handbook of Image and Video Processing. Elsevier Academic Press, 2010.

[21]

MATLAB. version 8.2 (R2012a). MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, 2013.

[22]

Valerie A McCormack and Isabel dos Santos Silva. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 15(6):1159--1169, 2006.

[23]

Naga R Mudigonda, Rangaraj M Rangayyan, and JE Leo Desautels. Gradient and texture analysis for the classification of mammographic masses. Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on, 19(10):1032--1043, 2000.

[24]

R. J. Nandi, A. K. Nandi, R. Rangayyan, and D. Scutt. Genetic programming and feature selection for classification of breast masses in mammograms. In 28th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS '06, pages 3021--3024, New York, USA, August 2006. IEEE.

[25]

F. Pedregosa et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12:2825--2830, 2011.

Digital Library

[26]

Nicholas Petrick, Berkman Sahiner, Samuel G Armato III, Alberto Bert, Loredana Correale, Silvia Delsanto, Matthew T Freedman, David Fryd, David Gur, Lubomir Hadjiiski, et al. Evaluation of computer-aided detection and diagnosis systemsa). Medical physics, 40(8):087001, 2013.

[27]

W. E. Polakowski, D. A. Cournoyer, and S. K. Rogers. Computer-aided breast cancer detection and diagnosis of masses using difference of gaussians and derivative-based feature saliency,. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag., 16:811--819, 1997.

[28]

Rangaraj M Rangayyan, Nema M El-Faramawy, JE Leo Desautels, and Onsy Abdel Alim. Measures of acutance and shape for classification of breast tumors. Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on, 16(6):799--810, 1997.

[29]

Conor Ryan, Krzysztof Krawiec, Una-May O'Reilly, Jeannie Fitzgerald, and David Medernach. Building a stage 1 computer aided detector for breast cancer using genetic programming. In M. Nicolau et al., editors, 17th European Conference on Genetic Programming, volume 8599 of LNCS, pages 162--173, Granada, Spain, 23--25 April 2014. Springer.

Digital Library

[30]

Robert A Smith, Stephen W Duffy, and László Tabár. Breast cancer screening: the evolving evidence. Oncology, 26(5):471--475, 2012.

[31]

Paul Stober and Shi-Tao Yeh. An explicit functional form specification approach to estimate the area under a receiver operating characteristic (roc) curve. Available at, http://www2. sas. com/proceedings/sugi27/p226--227.pdf, Accessed March, 7, 2007.

[32]

Tabar, L. et al. A new era in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Surgical oncology clinics of North America, 9(2):233--77, April 2000.

[33]

T. Tot, L. Tabar, and P. B. Dean. The pressing need for better histologic-mammographic correlation of the many variations in normal breast anatomy. Virchows Archiv, 437(4):338--344, October 2000.

Cited By

Kotyrba MVolna EHabiballa HCzyz J(2022)The Influence of Genetic Algorithms on Learning Possibilities of Artificial Neural NetworksComputers10.3390/computers1105007011:5(70)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/computers11050070
Rasche CReinecke AMargaria T(2022)Künstliche Intelligenz im Gesundheitswesen als Kernkompetenz? Status quo, Entwicklungslinien und disruptives PotenzialKünstliche Intelligenz im Gesundheitswesen10.1007/978-3-658-33597-7_2(49-79)Online publication date: 17-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33597-7_2
Mead TColey DBorden D(2020)Navigating the Tower of Babel: The Epistemological Shift of Bioinspired InnovationBiomimetics10.3390/biomimetics50400605:4(60)Online publication date: 9-Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics5040060
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Computer-aided detection and diagnosis of breast cancer with mammography: recent advances

Breast cancer is the second-most common and leading cause of cancer death among women. It has become a major health issue in the world over the past 50 years, and its incidence has increased in recent years. Early detection is an effective way to ...
Computer-aided breast cancer detection and classification in mammography: A comprehensive review
Abstract
Cancer is the second cause of mortality worldwide and it has been identified as a perilous disease. Breast cancer accounts for ∼20% of all new cancer cases worldwide, making it a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Mammography is an effective ...
Highlights
- Review of the automated detection/classification of breast cancer in mammograms.
- Comprehensive comparison of the effectiveness of various dissimilar approaches.
- Overview of studies utilizing sequential mammograms for increased ...
Analysis of framelets for breast cancer diagnosis

Breast cancer is the second threatening tumor among the women. The effective way of reducing breast cancer is its early detection which helps to improve the diagnosing process. Digital mammography plays a significant role in mammogram screening at ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

GECCO '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

July 2015

1496 pages

ISBN:9781450334723

DOI:10.1145/2739480

Editor:
Sara Silva
Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
,
General Chair:
Anna I. Esparcia-Alcázar
Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGEVO: ACM Special Interest Group on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 July 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Science Foundation Ireland

Conference

GECCO '15

Sponsor:

SIGEVO

GECCO '15: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference

July 11 - 15, 2015

Madrid, Spain

Acceptance Rates

GECCO '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 182 of 505 submissions, 36%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
215
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)3
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 01 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kotyrba MVolna EHabiballa HCzyz J(2022)The Influence of Genetic Algorithms on Learning Possibilities of Artificial Neural NetworksComputers10.3390/computers1105007011:5(70)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/computers11050070
Rasche CReinecke AMargaria T(2022)Künstliche Intelligenz im Gesundheitswesen als Kernkompetenz? Status quo, Entwicklungslinien und disruptives PotenzialKünstliche Intelligenz im Gesundheitswesen10.1007/978-3-658-33597-7_2(49-79)Online publication date: 17-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33597-7_2
Mead TColey DBorden D(2020)Navigating the Tower of Babel: The Epistemological Shift of Bioinspired InnovationBiomimetics10.3390/biomimetics50400605:4(60)Online publication date: 9-Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics5040060
Homayouni SFontes D(2018)BibliographyMetaheuristics for Maritime Operations10.1002/9781119483151.biblio(185-205)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2018
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119483151.biblio

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten