A HYBRID TEXTURAL AND GEOMETRICAL FEATURE EXTRACTION TO REVEAL HIDDEN INFORMATION FROM SUSPICIOUS REGIONS ON MAMMOGRAMS

Yıl 2022, , 70 - 86, 30.03.2022

İdil Isıklı Esener , Şükriye Kara , Semih Ergin , Cüneyt Çalışır

https://doi.org/10.18038/estubtda.906920

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Digital Mammography, Computer-Aided Diagnosis, Feature Extraction, Geometric Descriptor, Textural Descriptor

A HYBRID TEXTURAL AND GEOMETRICAL FEATURE EXTRACTION TO REVEAL HIDDEN INFORMATION FROM SUSPICIOUS REGIONS ON MAMMOGRAMS

Öz

A mammographic feature extraction scheme through textural and geometrical descriptors is examined to implement in a computer-aided diagnosis system for breast cancer diagnosis in this paper. This scheme is verified on a selected subset of suspicious regions (Region of Interest – ROIs) detected on a publicly available mammogram image database constructed by the Mammographic Image Analysis Society. The ROI detection is succeeded using the Chan-Vese active contour modelling after some pre-processing operations which are median filtering, morphological operations, and a region growing method performed for digitization noise reduction, artifact suppression and background removal, and pectoral muscle removal, respectively, applied on mammogram images. Then, a new adaptive convex hull approach is introduced for extracting geometrical descriptors of the ROIs accompanied by the Haralick features extracted from the gray-level co-occurrence matrices for textural description. In addition to geometrical and textural features, a hybrid mammographic feature vector is constructed by concatenating these features. All the three feature vectors are separately utilized to diagnose the ROIs via Random Forest classifier using 5-fold cross-validation. The experimental studies show that the textural features diagnose benignity more specifically and malignancy more accurately; and they are more effective on discriminating healthy ROIs when concatenated with geometrical features. Hence, a feature combination of these three features is proposed for diagnosis. The proposed feature combination is determined to be more effective for more accurate diagnoses of benignity and malignancy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Digital Mammography, Computer-Aided Diagnosis, Feature Extraction, Geometric Descriptor, Textural Descriptor

Kaynakça

• [1] World Health Organization, available at https://www.who.int/cancer/prevention/diagnosis-screening/breast-cancer/en/ (accessed January 2020).
• [2] Wang, L. Early diagnosis of breast cancer. Sensors 2017; 17 (7): 1572-1591.
• [3] Meenalochini G, Ramkumar S. Survey of machine learning algorithms for breast cancer detection using mammogram images. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021; 37 (2): 2738-2743.
• [4] Ergin S, Kılınç O. A new feature extraction framework based on wavelets for breast cancer diagnosis. Comput Biol Med, 2014; 51: 171-182.
• [5] Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Hacker A, Sedlacek S. Advantages and disadvantages of mammography screening. Breast Care, 2011; 6 (3):199-207.
• [6] Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin, 2011; 61 (2): 69-90.
• [7] Üncü YA, Özdoğan H. Mamografi sistemlerinde ilgi alanı, türev ve ince gruplama seçimlerinin modülasyon transfer fonksiyonunun üzerine etkileri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Dergisi, 2020; 15 (1): 23-35.
• [8] Üncü YA, Sevim G, Mercan T, Vural V, Durmaz E, Canpolat M. Differentiation of tumoral and non-tumoral breast lesions using back reflection diffuse optical tomography: A pilot clinical study. Int J Imaging Syst Technol, 2021; 1-9.
• [9] Radovic M, Djokovic M, Peulic A, Filipovic N. Application of data mining algorithms for mammogram classification. In: 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE); 10-13November 2013; Chania, Greece, 1–4.
• [10] Ganesan K, Acharya UR, Chua CK, Min LC, Matthew B, Thomas AK. Decision support system for breast cancer detection using mammograms. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 2013; 227 (7): 721–732.
• [11] Li JB, Wang YH, Chu SC, Roddick JF. Kernel self-optimization learning for kernel-based feature extraction and recognition. Inf Sci, 2014; 257: 70-80.
• [12] Ramos RP, Nascimento MZ, Pereira DC. Texture extraction: an evaluation of ridgelet, wavelet and co-occurrence based techniques applied to mammograms. Expert Syst Appl, 2012; 39 (12): 11036-11047.
• [13] Shradhananda B, Banshidhar M, Ratnakar D. Mammogram classification using two dimensional discrete wavelet transform and gray-level co-occurrence matrix for detection of breast cancer. Neurocomputing, 2015; 154: 1–14.
• [14] Vallez N et al. Breast density classification to reduce false positives in CADe systems. Comput Biol Med, 2013;113 (2): 569–584.
• [15] Imran S, Lodhi BA, Alzahrani A. Unsupervised method to localize masses in mammograms," in IEEE Access, 2021; 9: 99327-99338.
• [16] Heidari M et al. Applying a random projection algorithm to optimize machine learning model for breast lesion classification. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 2021; 68 (9): 2764-2775.
• [17] Loizidou K, Skouroumouni G, Nikolaou C, Pitris C. An Automated breast micro-calcification detection and classification technique using temporal subtraction of mammograms. IEEE Access, 2020; 8: 52785-52795.
• [18] Heidari M, Mirniaharikandehei S, Liu W, Hollingsworth AB, Liu H, Zheng B. Development and assessment of a new global mammographic image feature analysis scheme to predict likelihood of malignant cases. IEEE Trans Med Imaging, 2020; 39 (4): 1235-1244.
• [19] Sampaio WB, Diniz EM, Silva AC, Paiva AC, Gattass M. Detection of masses in mammogram images using CNN, geostatistic functions and SVM. Comput Biol Med, 2011; 41 (8): 653–664.
• [20] Keleş A, Keleş, A, Yavuz U. Expert system based on neuro-fuzzy rules for diagnosis breast cancer. Expert Syst Appl, 2011; 38 (5): 5719–5726.
• [21] Krishnan MMR, Banerjee S, Chakraborty C, Chakraborty C, Ray AK. Statistical analysis of mammographic features and its classification using support vector machine. Expert Syst Appl, 2010; 37 (1): 470–478.
• [22] Verma B, McLeod P, Klevansky A. A novel soft cluster neural network for the classification of suspicious areas in digital mammograms. Pattern Recognit, 2009; 42 (9): 1845–1852.
• [23] Papadopoulos A, Fotiadis DI, Costaridou L. Improvement of microcalcification cluster detection in mammography utilizing image enhancement techniques. Comput Biol Med, 2008; 38 (10): 1045–1055.
• [24] Işıklı Esener İ, Ergin S, Yüksel T. A genuine GLCM-based feature extraction for breast tissue classification on mammograms. Int J Intell Syst Appl Eng, 2016; 4 (Special Issue): 124-129.
• [25] Song R, Li T, Wang Y. Mammographic classification based on xgboost and dcnn with multi features. in IEEE Access, 2020; 8: 75011-75021.
• [26] Souza JC, Silva TF, Rocha SV, Paiva AC, Braz G, Almeida JD, Silva AC. Classification of malignant and benign tissues in mammography using dental shape descriptors and shape distribution. In: 2017 7th Latin American Conference on Networked and Electronic Media (LACNEM 2017); 6-7 Nov. 2017; Valparaiso, Chile, 22-27.
• [27] Osada R, Funkhouser T, Chazelle B, Dobkin D. Shape distributions. ACM Trans Graph, 2002; 21(4): 807–832.
• [28] Yu M, Atmosukarto I, Leow WK, Huang Z, Xu R. 3D model retrieval with morphing based geometric and topologic topological feature maps. In: 2003 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 18-20 June 2003; Madison, WI, USA, II-656.
• [29] Mahdikhanlou K, Ebrahimnezhad H. Plant leaf classification using centroid distance and axis of least inertia method. In: 2014 22nd Iranian Conference on Electrical Engineering (ICEE); 20-22 May 2014; Tehran, Iran, 1690-1694.
• [30] Türkoğlu M, Hanbay D. Plant recognition system based on extreme learning machine by using shearlet transform and new geometric features (article in Turkish with an abstract in English). J Fac Eng Archit Gaz, 2019; 34 (4): 2097-2112.
• [31] Azlan NAN, Lu CK, Elamvazuthi I, Tang TB. Automatic detection of masses from mammographic images via artificial intelligence techniques. IEEE Sens J, 2020 (21): 13094-13102.
• [32] Mohanty F, Rup S, Dash B, Majhi B, Swamy MNS. An improved scheme for digital mammogram classification using weighted chaotic salp swarm algorithm-based kernel extreme learning machine, Appl Soft Comput, 2020; 91: 1568-4946.
• [33] Işıklı Esener İ, Ergin S, Yüksel T. A coping with breast cancer diagnosis using a normalized texture feature set. In: 2017 International Conference on Engineering Technologies (ICENTE17); 7-9 December 2017; Konya, Turkey, 38-43.
• [34] Işıklı Esener İ, Ergin S, Yüksel T. A novel multistage system for the detection and removal of pectoral muscles in mammograms. Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci, 2018; 26 (1): 35-49.
• [35] Işıklı Esener İ, Ergin S, Yüksel T. A practical Region-of-Interest (ROI) detection approach for suspicious region identification in breast cancer diagnosis. In: 2017 International Conference on Engineering Technologies (ICENTE17); 7-9 December 2017; Konya, Turkey, 44-47.
• [36] Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I. Textural features of image classification. IEEE Trans Syst, Man, Cybern Syst, 1973; SMC-3 (6): 610-621.
• [37] Soh L, Tsatsaulis C. Texture analysis of SAR sea ice imagery using gray level co-occurrence matrices. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens, 1999; 37 (2): 780 – 795.
• [38] Clausi DA. An analysis of co-occurrence texture statistics as a function of grey level quantization. Can J Remote Sens, 2002; 28 (1): 45-62.
• [39] Suckling J, et al. The Mammographic Image Analysis Society Digital Mammogram Database. Exerpta Medica Int Congr Ser, 1994; 1069: 375-378.
• [40] Chan TF, Vese LA. Active contours without edges. IEEE Trans Image Process 2001; 10: 266-277.