Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms | International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Measures of angular spread and entropy 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

Architectural distortion is an important sign of early breast cancer. We present methods for computer-aided detection of architectural distortion in mammograms acquired prior to the diagnosis of breast cancer in the interval between scheduled screening sessions.

Methods

Potential sites of architectural distortion were detected using node maps obtained through the application of a bank of Gabor filters and linear phase portrait modeling. A total of 4,224 regions of interest (ROIs) were automatically obtained from 106 prior mammograms of 56 interval-cancer cases, including 301 true-positive ROIs, and from 52 mammograms of 13 normal cases. Each ROI was represented by three types of entropy measures of angular histograms composed with the Gabor magnitude response, angle, coherence, orientation strength, and the angular spread of power in the Fourier spectrum, including Shannon’s entropy, Tsallis entropy for nonextensive systems, and Rényi entropy for extensive systems.

Results

Using the entropy measures with stepwise logistic regression and the leave-one-patient-out method for feature selection and cross-validation, an artificial neural network resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75. Free-response receiver operating characteristics indicated a sensitivity of 0.80 at 5.2 false positives (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, with a high sensitivity and a moderate number of FPs per patient. The results are promising and may be improved with additional features to characterize subtle abnormalities and larger databases including prior mammograms.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /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 (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

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

References

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 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, vol 1268. International congress series, Elsevier B.V., pp 867–871 (Proceedings of the 18th international congress and exhibition on computer assisted radiology and surgery (CARS2004))

  3. Yankaskas BC, Schell MJ, Bird RE, Desrochers DA (2001) Reassessment of breast cancers missed during routine screening mammography: a community based study. Am J Roentgenol 177: 535–541

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Burrell H, Evans A, Wilson A, Pinder S (2001) False-negative breast screening assessment: what lessons we can learn?. Clin Radiol 56: 385–388

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schneider MA (2001) Better detection: Improving our chances. In: Yaffe MJ (ed) Digital mammography: 5th international workshop on digital mammography. Medical Physics Publishing, Toronto, ON, Canada, pp 3–6

  6. 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 

  7. 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 

  8. 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

    Google Scholar 

  9. 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 

  10. 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 

  11. 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 Sel Top Signal Process 3(1): 46–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 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 

  15. 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 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 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 

  18. Sampat MP, Markey MK, Bovik AC (2006) Measurement and detection of spiculated lesions. In: IEEE southwest symposium on image analysis and interpretation, pp 105–109. IEEE Computer Society

  19. 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 

  20. 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(1). Barcelona, Spain, pp S418–S419

  21. Ayres FJ, Rangayyan RM (2007) Reduction of false positives in the detection of architectural distortion in mammograms by using a geometrically constrained phase portrait model. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 1: 361–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sumkin JH, Holbert BL, Herrmann JS, Hakim CA, Ganott MA, Poller WR, Shah R, Hardesty LA, Gur D (2003) Optimal reference mammography: a comparison of mammograms obtained 1 and 2 years before the present examination. Am J Roentgenol 180: 343–346

    Google Scholar 

  23. Varela C, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R (2005) Use of prior mammograms in the classification of benign and malignant masses. Eur J Radiol 56: 248–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X (2003) Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. RadioGraphics 23: 881–895

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rangayyan RM, Banik S, Desautels JEL (2011) Detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms using measures of angular distribution. In: Summers RM, van Ginneken B (eds) Proceedings of SPIE medical imaging 2011: computer aided diagnosis, Orlando, FL, February, vol 7963, pp 796308:1–9

  26. Banik S, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL (2011) Rényi entropy of angular spread for detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA), pp 609–612, Bari, Italy

  27. Banik S, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL (2011) Detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval cancer using measures of angular spread and Tsallis entropy. In: Proceedings of the 25th international congress and exhibition: computer assisted radiology and surgery, vol 6. Berlin, Germany, pp S188–S189

  28. Alberta Cancer Board (2004) Screen test: Alberta program for the early detection of breast cancer–2001/03 Biennial Report. Alberta, Canada. http://www.cancerboard.ab.ca/screentest

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

    Google Scholar 

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

  31. Mudigonda NR, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL (2001) Detection of breast masses in mammograms by density slicing and texture flow-field analysis. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20(12): 1215–1227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 3(6): 610–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423, 623–656

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rényi A (1961) On measures of entropy and information. In: Proceedings of the 4th Berkeley symposium on mathematics, statistics and probability, vol 1. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, pp 547–561

  35. Zhang D, Jia X, Ding H, Ye D, Thakor NV (2010) Application of Tsallis entropy to EEG: quantifying the presence of burst suppression after asphyxial cardiac arrest in rats. IEEE Trans Biomed Engg 57(4): 867–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Masi M (2005) A step beyond Tsallis and R ényi entropies. Phys Lett A 338(3–5): 217–224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Tsallis C (1988) Possible generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics. J Stat Phys 52(1): 479–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Johal RS, Tirnakli U (2004) Tsallis versus Renyi entropic form for systems with q-exponential behaviour: the case of dissipative maps. Physica A 331(3–4): 487–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rodrigues PS, Giraldi GA, Chang R-F, Suri JS (2006) Non-extensive entropy for CAD systems of breast cancer images. In: The 19th Brazilian symposium on computer graphics and image processing, pp 121–128

  40. Rodrigues PS, Giraldi GA (2009) Computing the q-index for Tsallis nonextensive image segmentation. In: Brazilian symposium on computer graphics and image processing, pp 232–237

  41. Kinsner W (2005) A unified approach to fractal dimensions. In: Proceedings of the fourth IEEE international conference on cognitive informatics (ICCI). IEEE Computer Society, Irvine, CA, pp 58–72

  42. Gabarda S, Cristóbal G (2008) Discrimination of isotrigon textures using the Rényi entropy of Allan variances. J Opt Soc Am A 25(9): 2309–2319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Li Y, Fan X, Li G (2006) Image segmentation based on Tsallis-entropy and Renyi-entropy and their comparison. In: IEEE international conference on industrial informatics, Singapore, pp 943–948

  44. Sahoo P, Wilkins C, Yeager J (1997) Threshold selection using Renyi’s entropy. Pattern Recogn 30(1): 71–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mohanalin J, Kalra PK, Kumar N (2009) Extraction of micro calcification using non extensive property of mammograms. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE international advance computing conference (IACC 2009) Patiala, India, pp 636–641

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

    Google Scholar 

  47. Haykin S (1999) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  48. ROCKIT (2010) Kurt Rossmann Laboratories for Radiologic Image Research. ROC Software. http://www-radiology.uchicago.edu/krl/roc_soft6.htm. Accessed 20 Feb 2010

  49. Chakraborty DP (2002) Statistical power in observer-performance studies: Comparison of the receiver operating characteristic and free-response methods in tasks involving localization. Acad Radiol 9(2): 147–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. 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 

  51. Matsubara T, Ichikawa T, Hara T, Fujita H, Kasai S, Endo T, Iwase T (2003) Automated detection methods for architectural distortions around skinline and within mammary gland on mammograms. In: Lemke HU, Vannier MW, Inamura K, Farman AG, Doi K, Reiber JHC (eds) International congress series: proceedings of the 17th international congress and exhibition on computer assisted radiology and surgery. Elsevier, London, UK, pp 950–955

  52. Heath M, Bowyer K, Kopans D, Moore R, Kegelmeyer WP (2001) The Digital Database for Screening Mammography. In: Yaffe MJ (eds) Proceedings of the fifth international workshop on digital mammography. Medical Physics Publishing, Toronto, pp 212–218

    Google Scholar 

  53. 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, UK, pp 375–378

    Google Scholar 

  54. 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 

  55. 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 

  56. 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, VA, pp 492–495

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    Shantanu Banik, Rangaraj M. Rangayyan & J. E. Leo Desautels

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    Rangaraj M. Rangayyan

Authors
  1. Shantanu Banik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rangaraj M. Rangayyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. E. Leo Desautels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rangaraj M. Rangayyan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Banik, S., Rangayyan, R.M. & Desautels, J.E.L. Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. Int J CARS 8, 121–134 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0681-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0681-x

Keywords