Deformable registration for quantifying longitudinal tumor changes during neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Volumn 73, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 2343-2356

  Ou, Yangming ^a,b   Weinstein, Susan P ^a   Conant, Emily F ^a   Englander, Sarah ^a   Da, Xiao ^a   Gaonkar, Bilwaj ^a   Hsieh, Meng Kang ^a   Rosen, Mark ^a   Demichele, Angela ^a   Davatzikos, Christos ^a   Kontos, Despina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer; deformable image registration; evaluation; longitudinal breast MRI; treatment; tumor changes

Indexed keywords

CHEMOTHERAPY; DEFORMATION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; TUMORS;

BREAST CANCER; BREAST MRI; DEFORMABLE IMAGE REGISTRATION; EVALUATION; TREATMENT;

MEDICAL IMAGING;

CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOCETAXEL; DOXORUBICIN; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADODIAMIDE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; TAXOID;

ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DEFORMABLE IMAGE REGISTRATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGING AND DISPLAY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR INVASION; ADJUVANT THERAPY; ANATOMIC LANDMARK; BREAST NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANATOMIC LANDMARKS; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOXORUBICIN; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TAXOIDS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84929653305     PISSN: 07403194     EISSN: 15222594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.25368     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2013. Available at: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/ documents/document/acspc-036845.pdf, 2013. Accessed on November 16, 2013.
2. Hylton NM, Blume JD, Bernreuter WK, et al., Locally advanced breast cancer: MR imaging for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy results from ACRIN 6657/i-spy trial. Radiology 2012; 263: 663-672.
3. Hall FM,. MR imaging for the prediction of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 2013; 266: 367-367.
4. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C, Ferrari L, Moliterni A, Terenziani M, Zambetti M,. Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight-year experience at the milan cancer institute. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 93-100.
5. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al., Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2672-2685.
6. 1H MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2009; 251: 653-662.
7. McLaughlin R, Hylton N,. MRI in breast cancer therapy monitoring. NMR Biomed 2011; 24: 712-720.
8. Takada M, Sugimoto M, Ohno S, et al., Predictions of the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primary breast cancer using a data mining technique. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 134: 661-670.
9. Abramson RG, Li X, Hoyt TL, Su PF, Arlinghaus LR, Wilson KJ, Abramson VG, Chakravarthy AB, Yankeelov TE,. Early assessment of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by semi-quantitative analysis of high-temporal resolution DCE-MRI: preliminary results. Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 31: 1457-1464.
10. Weis JA, Miga MI, Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, Farley J, Yankeelov TE,. A mechanically coupled reaction-diffusion model for predicting the response of breast tumors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58: 5851-5866.
11. Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Weis JA, Li X, Dula AN, Chekmenev EY, Smith SA, Miga MI, Abramson VG, Yankeelov TE,. Current and emerging quantitative magnetic resonance imaging methods for assessing and predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. Breast Cancer 2012; 2012: 139-154.
12. Atuegwu NC, Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson VG, Sanders ME, Yankeelov TE,. Parameterizing the logistic model of tumor growth by DW-MRI and DCE-MRI data to predict treatment response and changes in breast cancer cellularity during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Transl Oncol 2013; 6: 256-264.
13. Li X, Arlinghaus LR, Ayers GD, et al., DCE-MRI analysis methods for predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: pilot study findings. Magn Reson Med 2014; 71: 1592-1602.
14. Mani S, Chen Y, Li X, Arlinghaus L, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, Bhave SR, Levy MA, Xu H, Yankeelov TE,. Machine learning for predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20: 688-695.
15. Rajan R, Esteva F, Symmans W,. Pathologic changes in breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: implications for the assessment of response. Clin Breast Cancer 2004; 5: 235-238.
16. Tateishi U, Miyake M, Nagaoka T, Terauchi T, Kubota K, Kinoshita T, Daisaki H, Macapinlac H,. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: prediction of pathologic response with PET/CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-prospective assessment. Radiology 2012; 263: 53-63.
17. Lin M, Chen J, Mehta R, Bahri S, Chan S, Nalcioglu O, Su M,. Spatial shrinkage/expansion patterns between breast density measured in two MRI scans evaluated by non-rigid registration. Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 5865-5875.
18. Sarkar S, Johnson T, Ma B, Chenevert T, Bland P, Park H, Schott A, Ross B, Meyer C,. Evaluation of an automatic registration-based algorithm for direct measurement of volume change in tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 83: 1038-1046.
19. Ou Y, Sotiras A, Paragios N, Davatzikos C,. DRAMMS: deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting. Med Image Anal 2011; 15: 622-639.
20. Londero V, Bazzocchi M, Del Frate C, Puglisi F, Di Loreto C, Francescutti G, Zuiani C,. Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 2004; 14: 1371-1379.
21. Wasif N, Garreau J, Terando A, Kirsch D, Mund D, Giuliano A,. MRI versus ultrasonography and mammography for preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Am Surg 2009; 75: 970-975.
22. Partridge S, Gibbs J, Lu Y, Esserman L, Tripathy D, Wolverton D, Rugo H, Hwang E, Ewing C, Hylton N,. MRI measurements of breast tumor volume predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence-free survival. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1774-1781.
23. Nie K, Chen J, Chan S, Chau M, Yu H, Bahri S, Tseng T, Nalcioglu O, Su M,. Development of a quantitative method for analysis of breast density based on three-dimensional breast MRI. Med Phys 2008; 35: 5253-5262.
24. Symmans W, Liu J, Knowles D, Inghirami G,. Breast cancer heterogeneity: evaluation of clonality in primary and metastatic lesions. Human Pathol 1995; 26: 210-216.
25. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstein D, Fields S, Strano S,. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 1997; 3: 780-782.
26. Sharifi-Salamatian V, Pesquet-Popescu B, Simony-Lafontaine J, Rigaut J,. Index for spatial heterogeneity in breast cancer. J Microsc 2004; 216: 110-122.
27. Anderson W, Matsuno R,. Breast cancer heterogeneity: a mixture of at least two main types? J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98: 948-951.
28. Stingl J, Caldas C,. Molecular heterogeneity of breast carcinomas and the cancer stem cell hypothesis. Nat Rev Cancer 2007; 7: 791-799.
29. Polyak K,. Heterogeneity in breast cancer. J Clin Investig 2011; 121: 3786-3788.
30. Maday P, Khurd P, Ladic L, Schnall M, Rosen M, Davatzikos C, Kamen A,. Imaging as a surrogate for the early prediction and assessment of treatment response through the analysis of 4-d texture ensembles (ISEPARATE). Med Comput Vis Recogn Tech Appl Med Imaging 2011; 164-173.
31. Li X, Arlinghaus L, Chakravarthy A, Farley J, Mayer I, Abramson V, Kelley M, Meszoely I, Means-Powell J, Yankeelov T,. Early DCE-MRI changes after longitudinal registration may predict breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In Workshop on Biomedical Image Registration (WBIR), Nashville, Tennessee, USA, 2012. pp 229-235.
32. Li X, Arlinghaus L, Chakravarthy A, et al., Voxel-based analysis of early DCE-MRI changes may predict the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Melbourne, Australia, 2012. p. 1465.
33. De Los Santos JF, Cantor A, Amos KD, et al., Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of pathologic response in patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment for operable breast cancer. Cancer 2013; 119: 1776-1783.
34. Jones EF, Sinha SP, Newitt DC, Klifa C, Kornak J, Park CC, Hylton NM,. MRI enhancement in stromal tissue surrounding breast tumors: association with recurrence free survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. PloS One 2013; 8: e61969.
35. Klein A, Andersson J, Ardekani B, et al., Evaluation of 14 nonlinear deformation algorithms applied to human brain MRI registration. Neuroimage 2009; 46: 786-802.
36. Avants BB, Tustison NJ, Song G, Cook PA, Klein A, Gee JC,. A reproducible evaluation of ants similarity metric performance in brain image registration. NeuroImage 2011; 54: 2033-2044.
37. Murphy K, van Ginneken B, Reinhardt J, Kabus S, Ding K, Deng X, Pluim J,. Evaluation of methods for pulmonary image registration: the EMPIRE10 study. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2011; 30: 1901-1920.
38. Ou Y, Ye DH, Pohl KM, Davatzikos C,. Validation of DRAMMS among 12 popular methods in cross-subject cardiac MRI registration. In: Biomedical image registration. Springer; 2012. pp 209-219.
39. Dura E, Domingo J, Ayala G, Martí-Bonmatí L,. Evaluation of the registration of temporal series of contrast-enhanced perfusion magnetic resonance 3d images of the liver. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2012; 108: 932-945.
40. Cifor A, Risser L, Chung D, Anderson E, Schnabel J,. Hybrid feature-based diffeomorphic registration for tumour tracking in 2-d liver ultrasound images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2013; 32: 1647-1656.
41. Bakic P, Albert M, Brzakovic D, Maidment A,. Mammogram synthesis using a 3d simulation. i. Breast tissue model and image acquisition simulation. Med Phys 2002; 29: 2131.
42. van Engeland S, Snoeren P, Hendriks J, Karssemeijer N,. A comparison of methods for mammogram registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003; 22: 1436-1444.
43. Filev P, Hadjiiski L, Sahiner B, Chan H, Helvie M,. Comparison of similarity measures for the task of template matching of masses on serial mammograms. Med Phys 2005; 32: 515.
44. Richard F, Bakic P, Maidment A,. Mammogram registration: a phantom-based evaluation of compressed breast thickness variation effects. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006; 25: 188-197.
45. Hipwell J, Tanner C, Crum W, Schnabel JA, Hawkes D,. A new validation method for X-ray mammogram registration algorithms using a projection model of breast X-ray compression. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2007; 26: 1190-1200.
46. Diez Y, Oliver A, Lladõ X, Marti R,. Comparison of registration methods using mamographic images. In 17th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), IEEE, Hongkong, China, 2010. pp. 4421-4424.
47. Pereira S, Hipwell J, McCormack V, et al., Automated registration of diagnostic to prediagnostic X-ray mammograms: evaluation and comparison to radiologists accuracy. Med Phys 2010; 37: 4530-4539.
48. Denton E, Sonoda L, Rueckert D, Rankin S, Hayes C, Leach M, Hill D, Hawkes D,. Comparison and evaluation of rigid, affine, and nonrigid registration of breast MR images. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23: 800-805.
49. Tanner C, Schnabel J, Degenhard A, Castellano-Smith A, Hayes C, Leach M, Hose D, Hill D, Hawkes D,. Validation of volume-preserving non-rigid registration: application to contrast-enhanced MR-mammography. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI. Tokyo, Japan, 2002. pp. 307-314.
50. Schnabel J, Tanner C, Castellano-Smith A, Degenhard A, Leach M, Hose D, Hill D, Hawkes D,. Validation of nonrigid image registration using finite-element methods: application to breast MR images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003; 22: 238-247.
51. Tanner C, Schnabel JA, Hill D, Hawkes D, Degenhard A, Leach M, Hose D, Hall-Craggs M, Usiskin S,. Quantitative evaluation of free-form deformation registration for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Med Phys 2007; 34: 1221-1233.
52. Martel A, Froh M, Brock K, Plewes D, Barber D,. Evaluating an optical-flow-based registration algorithm for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52: 3803.
53. Hill A, Mehnert A, Crozier S, McMahon K,. Evaluating the accuracy and impact of registration in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng 2009; 35: 106-120.
54. Kim M, Wu G, Shen D,. Hierarchical alignment of breast DCE-MR images by groupwise registration and robust feature matching. Med Phys 2012; 39: 353-366.
55. Kuczyński K, Siczek M, Stegierski R,. Application of image registration techniques in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of breast. J Med Inform 2011; 17: 275-280.
56. Rohlfing T, Maurer C, Jr, Bluemke D, Jacobs M,. Volume-preserving nonrigid registration of MR breast images using free-form deformation with an incompressibility constraint. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003; 22: 730-741.
57. Wang Y, Dang J, Du X, Li S,. A non-rigid registration method for dynamic contrast enhancement breast MRI. Intell Comput Inform Sci 2011; 644-649.
58. Crum W, Tanner C, Hawkes D,. Anisotropic multi-scale fluid registration: evaluation in magnetic resonance breast imaging. Phys Med Biol 2005; 50: 5153-5174.
59. Hayton P, Brady M, Smith S, Moore N,. A non-rigid registration algorithm for dynamic breast MR images. Artif Intell 1999; 114: 125-156.
60. Tanner C, Schnabel J, Chung D, Clarkson M, Rueckert D, Hill D, Hawkes D,. Volume and shape preservation of enhancing lesions when applying non-rigid registration to a time series of contrast enhancing MR breast images. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI. Pittsburgh, PA: Springer; 2000. pp. 327-337.
61. Arlinghaus L, Li X, Levy M, Smith D, Welch E, Gore J, Yankeelov T,. Current and future trends in magnetic resonance imaging assessments of the response of breast tumors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Oncol 2010: 1-17.
62. Roose L, Loeckx D, Mollemans W, Maes F, Suetens P,. Adaptive boundary conditions for physically based follow-up breast MR image registration. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI. New York City, NY, USA, 2008. pp. 839-846.
63. Esserman L, Perou C, Cheang M, DeMichele A, Carey L, van't Veer L, Gray J, Petricoin E, Conway K, Berry D,. Breast cancer molecular profiles and tumor response of neoadjuvant doxorubicin and paclitaxel: the i-spy trial (calgb 150007/150012, acrin 6657). J Clin Oncol 2009; 27 (18 Suppl): 515.
64. Barker A, Sigman C, Kelloff G, Hylton N, Berry D, Esserman L,. I-spy 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009; 86: 97-100.
65. Chen J, Feig B, Agrawal G, Yu H, Carpenter P, Mehta R, Nalcioglu O, Su M,. MRI evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumors in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer 2008; 112: 17-26.
66. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer J, et al., Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1796-1804.
67. McAuliffe MJ, Lalonde FM, McGarry D, Gandler W, Csaky K, Trus BL,. Medical image processing, analysis and visualization in clinical research. In 14th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS 2001). Proceedings. IEEE, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 2001. pp. 381-386.
68. Sled JG, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC,. A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1998; 17: 87-97.
69. Thirion J,. Image matching as a diffusion process: an analogy with maxwell's demons. Med Image Anal 1998; 2: 243-260.
70. Vercauteren T, Pennec X, Perchant A, Ayache N,. Diffeomorphic demons: efficient non-parametric image registration. NeuroImage 2008; 45: S61-S72.
71. Rueckert D, Sonoda L, Hayes C, Hill D, Leach M, Hawkes D,. Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1999; 18: 712-721.
72. Modersitzki J,. Numerical methods for image registration, numerical mathematics and scientific computation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2004.
73. Boehler T, Schilling K, Bick U, Hahn H,. Deformable image registration of follow-up breast magnetic resonance images. In Workshop of Biomedical Image Registration (WBIR), Lübeck, Germany, 2010. pp. 13-24.
74. Meyer C, Boes J, Kim B, Bland P, Zasadny K, Kison P, Koral K, Frey K, Wahl R,. Demonstration of accuracy and clinical versatility of mutual information for automatic multimodality image fusion using affine and thin-plate spline warped geometric deformations. Med Image Anal 1997; 1: 195-206.
75. Ou Y, Davatzikos C,. DRAMMS: deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting. In: Information processing in medical imaging. Springer; Williamsburgh, VA: 2009, pp. 50-62.
76. Glocker B, Komodakis N, Tziritas G, Navab N, Paragios N,. Dense image registration through MRFs and efficient linear programming. Med Image Anal 2008; 12: 731-741.
77. Glocker B, Sotiras A, Komodakis N, Paragios N,. Deformable medical image registration: setting the state of the art with discrete methods. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2011; 13: 219-244.
78. Pheiffer T, Ou J, Ong R, Miga M,. Automatic generation of boundary conditions using demons nonrigid image registration for use in 3-d modality-independent elastography. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2011; 58: 2607-2616.
79. Li X, Dawant B, Welch E, Chakravarthy A, Freehardt D, Mayer I, Kelley M, Meszoely I, Gore J, Yankeelov T,. A nonrigid registration algorithm for longitudinal breast MR images and the analysis of breast tumor response. Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 27: 1258-1270.
80. Ou Y, Akbari H, Billelo M, Da X, Davatzikos C,. Comparative evaluation of registration algorithms for different brain databases with varying difficulty: Results and insights. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2014. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2330355.
81. Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K, Viergever MA, Pluim JP,. Elastix: a toolbox for intensity-based medical image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010; 29: 196-205.
82. Avants BB, Epstein CL, Grossman M, Gee JC,. Symmetric diffeomorphic image registration with cross-correlation: evaluating automated labeling of elderly and neurodegenerative brain. Med Image Anal 2008; 12: 26-41.
83. Ardekani BA, Braun M, Hutton BF, Kanno I, Iida H,. A fully automatic multimodality image registration algorithm. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995; 19: 615-623.
84. Shen D, Davatzikos C,. HAMMER: hierarchical attribute matching mechanism for elastic registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2002; 21: 1421-1439.
85. Heinrich MP, Jenkinson M, Bhushan M, Matin T, Gleeson FV, Brady SM, Schnabel JA,. Mind: modality independent neighbourhood descriptor for multi-modal deformable registration. Med Image Anal 2012; 16: 1423-1435.
86. Modat M, Ridgway GR, Taylor ZA, Lehmann M, Barnes J, Hawkes DJ, Fox NC, Ourselin S,. Fast free-form deformation using graphics processing units. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2010; 98: 278-284.
87. Sharp G, Li R, Wolfgang J, Chen G, Peroni M, Spadea M, Mori S, Zhang J, Shackleford J, Kandasamy N,. Plastimatchan open source software suite for radiotherapy image processing. In Proceedings of the International Conference on the use of Computers in Radiotherapy (ICCR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 2010.
88. Shen D, Davatzikos C,. Measuring temporal morphological changes robustly in brain MR images via 4-dimensional template warping. NeuroImage 2004; 21: 1508-1517.
89. Zöllei L, Learned-Miller E, Grimson E, Wells W,. Efficient population registration of 3d data. In Computer Vision for Biomedical Image Applications. Beijing, China: Springer; 2005. pp. 291-301.
90. Geng X, Christensen GE, Gu H, Ross TJ, Yang Y,. Implicit reference-based group-wise image registration and its application to structural and functional MRI. NeuroImage 2009; 47: 1341-1351.
91. Reuter M, Rosas HD, Fischl B,. Highly accurate inverse consistent registration: a robust approach. NeuroImage 2010; 53: 1181-1196.
92. Csapo I, Davis B, Shi Y, Sanchez M, Styner M, Neithammer M,. Longitudinal image registration with temporally-dependent image similarity measure. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2013; 1939-1951.
93. Wu S, Weinstein S, Conant E, Localio A, Schnall M, Kontos D,. Fully automated chest wall line segmentation in breast MRI by using context information. In: SPIE Medical Imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, San Diego, California, USA, 2012. pp. 831507-831507.
94. Wu S, Weinstein S, Conant E, Schnall M, Kontos D,. Automated chest wall line detection for whole-breast segmentation in sagittal breast MR images. Med Phys 2013; 40: 1-12.
95. Gao Y, Tannenbaum A, Chen H, Torres M, Yoshida E, Yang X, Wang Y, Curran W, Liu T,. Automated skin segmentation in ultrasonic evaluation of skin toxicity in breast cancer radiotherapy. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013; 39: 2166-2175.
96. Ou Y, Besbes A, Bilello M, Mansour M, Davatzikos C, Paragios N,. Detecting mutually-salient landmark pairs with MRF regularization. In International symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro. IEEE, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2010. pp. 400-403.
97. Sotiras A, Ou Y, Glocker B, Davatzikos C, Paragios N,. Simultaneous geometric-iconic registration. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI. Beijing, China: Springer; 2010. pp. 676-683.
98. Xing Y, Ou Y, Englander S, Schnall M, Shen D,. Simultaneous estimation and segmentation of t1 map for breast parenchyma measurement. In: 4th IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro. ISBI. IEEE, Washington DC, USA, 2007. pp. 332-335.
99. Wu S, Weinstein S, Kontos D,. Atlas-based probabilistic fibroglandular tissue segmentation in breast MRI. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI, Nice, France, 2012. pp. 437-445.
100. Zheng Y, Englander S, Baloch S, Zacharaki E, Fan Y, Schnall M, Shen D,. Step: Spatiotemporal enhancement pattern for MR-based breast tumor diagnosis. Med Phys 2009; 36: 3192-3204.
101. Zheng Y, Baloch S, Englander S, Schnall M, Shen D,. Segmentation and classification of breast tumor using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images. Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI, Brisbane, Australia, 2007. pp. 393-401.
102. Ashraf A, Gavenonis S, Daye D, Mies C, Rosen M, Kontos D,. A multichannel markov random field framework for tumor segmentation with an application to classification of gene expression-based breast cancer recurrence risk. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2012; 32: 637-648.
103. Seshamani S, Rajan P, Kumar R, Girgis H, Dassopoulos T, Mullin G, Hager G,. A meta registration framework for lesion matching. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention-MICCAI. London: Springer; 2009. pp. 582-589.
104. Muenzing SE, van Ginneken B, Pluim JP,. On combining algorithms for deformable image registration. In: Biomedical Image Registration. Nashville, TN: Springer; 2012. pp. 256-265.