Effect of variable gain on computerized texture analysis on digitalized mammograms

Computerized texture analysis of mammographic images has emerged as a means to characterize breast parenchyma and estimate breast percentage density, and thus, to ultimately assess the risk of developing breast cancer. However, during the digitization process, mammographic images may be modified and optimized for viewing purposes, or mammograms may be digitized with different scanners. It is important to demonstrate how computerized texture analysis will be affected by differences in the digital image acquisition. In this study, mammograms from 172 subjects, 30 women with the BRCA1/2 gene-mutation and 142 low-risk women, were retrospectively collected and digitized. Contrast enhancement based on a look-up table that simulates the histogram of a mixed-density breast was applied on very dense and very fatty breasts. Computerized texture analysis was performed on these transformed images, and the effect of variable gain on computerized texture analysis on mammograms was investigated. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used as a figure of merit to assess the individual texture feature performance in the task of distinguishing between the high-risk and the low-risk women for developing breast cancer. For those features based on coarseness measures and fractal measures, the histogram transformation (contrast enhancement) showed little effect on the classification performance of these features. However, as expected, for those features based on gray-scale histogram analysis, such as balance and skewnesss, and contrast measures, large variations were observed in terms of AUC values for those features. Understanding this effect will allow us to better assess breast cancer risk using computerized texture analysis.

[1]  N F Boyd,et al.  Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. , 1998, Breast disease.

[2]  Li Lan,et al.  Fractal analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns in breast cancer risk assessment. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[3]  Caroline Diorio,et al.  Wolfe's parenchymal pattern and percentage of the breast with mammographic densities: redundant or complementary classifications? , 2003, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[4]  Martin J. Yaffe,et al.  Mammographic densities as a marker of human breast cancer risk and their use in chemoprevention , 2001, Current oncology reports.

[5]  Maryellen L. Giger,et al.  Power Spectral Analysis of Mammographic Parenchymal Patterns for Breast Cancer Risk Assessment , 2008, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[6]  J. Wolfe Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. , 1976, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  Michael J. Carston,et al.  Texture Features from Mammographic Images and Risk of Breast Cancer , 2009, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[8]  Maryellen L. Giger,et al.  Computerized texture analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns of digitized mammograms , 2004, CARS.

[9]  Ann-Katherine Carton,et al.  Parenchymal texture analysis in digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer risk estimation: a preliminary study. , 2009, Academic radiology.

[10]  Zhimin Huo,et al.  Computerized analysis of digitized mammograms of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. , 2002, Radiology.

[11]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer Statistics, 2009 , 2009, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[12]  R. Warren,et al.  Mammographic patterns as a predictive biomarker of breast cancer risk: effect of tamoxifen. , 1999, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.