Robust segmentation of mass-lesions in contrast-enhanced dynamic breast MR images

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 110-119

  Meine, Lina A ^a,b   Buelow, Thomas ^c   Huo, Dezheng ^b   Shimauchi, Akiko ^b   Kose, Ursula ^d   Buurman, Johannes ^d   Newstead, Gillian ^b  

^a PHILIPS RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c PHILIPS RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Germany)

^d PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Computer aided diagnosis system; Dynamic contrast enhanced breast MRI; Mass lesion; Observer study; Segmentation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST LESION; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ALGORITHM; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; DIAGNOSTIC USE; EVALUATION STUDY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADODIAMIDE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ALGORITHMS; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 77954123075     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22206     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. American Cancer Society. Learn about breast cancer. Available at: www.cancer.org. Accessed July 2007.
2. Imaginis. Breast cancer: statistics on incidence, survival, and screening. Available at: http://www.imaginis.com/breasthealth/statistics.asp. Accessed January 2008.
3. American Cancer Society. Guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. Available at: http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/ content/full/57/2/75. Accessed February 2009.
4. Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK, et al. MRI Evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1295-1303. (Pubitemid 46513295)
5. Giger ML, Huo Z. Artificial neural networks in breast cancer diagnosis: merging of computer-extracted features from breast images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1999;17:1768-1769.
6. Meinel LA, Stolpen AH, Berbaum KS, et al. Breast MRI lesion classification: comparison between human readers and backpropagation neural network (BNN). J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25: 89-95.
7. Chen W, Giger M, Lan L, Bick U. Computerized interpretation of breast MRI: investigation of enhancement-variance dynamics. Med Phys 2004;31:1076-1082. (Pubitemid 38656778)
8. Chen W, Giger M, Bick U. A fuzzy c-means (FCM)-based approach for computerized segmentation of breast lesions in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images. Acad Radiol 2006;13:63-72. (Pubitemid 43041894)
9. Lucas-Quesada F, Sinha U, Sinha S. Segmentation strategies for breast tumors from dynamic MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;6:753-763.
10. Gilhuijs K, Giger M, Bick U. A method for computerized assessment of tumor extent in contrast enhanced MR images of the breast. Computer-Aided Diagn Med Imaging 1999:305-310.
11. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Veltman J, Huisman H, et al. Automated analysis of contrast enhancement in breast MRI lesions using mean shift clustering for ROI selection. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007; 26:606-614.
12. Castellani U, Cristiani M, Daducci A, et al. DCE-MRI data analysis for cancer area classification. Methods Inf Med 2009;48: 248-253.
13. Buelow Th, Meinel LA, Wiemker R, Kose U, Shimauchi A, Newstead G. Segmentation of suspicious lesions in dynamic, contrast-enhanced breast MR images. SPIE Med Imaging 2007.
14. Jaehne B. Practical handbook on image processing for scientific applications. 2nd edition. Washington, DC: CRC Press; 1997.
15. Dutton G. Locational properties of quaternary triangular meshes. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Zurich, 1990. p 901-910.
16. Wiemker R, Wormanns D, Deyer F, et al. Improved sensitivity of dynamic CT with a new visualization method for radial distribution of lung nodule enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting on the Scientific and Technical Aspects of Medical Imaging (SPIE), San Diego, 2005. (abstract 5746).
17. Kuhnigk JM, Dicken V, Bornemann L, et al. Morphological segmentation and partial volume analysis for volumetry of solid pulmonary lesions in thoracic CT scans. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25:417-434.
18. Meinel LA, Buelow Th, Bergtholdt M, Kose U, Shimauchi A, Newstead G. Segmentation of DCE breast MRI masses: pilot observer study. In: Proceeding of the 17th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Toronto, Canada, May 2008.
19. Meinel LA, Buelow Th, Kose U, Huo D, Shimauchi A, Newstead G. Evaluation of computerized DCE-breast MRI mass lesion segmentation: an observer study. In: Proceedings of the 94th Annual Meeting of RSNA, Chicago, 2008.
20. Gluer CC, Blake G, Lu Y, Blunt BA, Jergas M, Genant HK. Accurate assessment of precision errors: how to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques. Osteoporos Int 1995;5: 262-270.
21. Lin L. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989;45:255-268. (Pubitemid 19109172)