MRI imaging texture features in prostate lesions classification

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common diagnosed cancer and cause of cancer-related death among men. Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD) systems are used to support radiologists in multiparametric Magnetic Resonance (mpMR) image-based analysis in order to avoid unnecessary biopsis and increase radiologist’s specificity. CAD systems have been reported in many papers for the last decade. The reported results have been obtained on small, private data sets and are impossible to reproduce or verify concluded remarks. PROSTATEx challenge organizers provided database that contains approximately 350 MRI cases, each from a distinct patient, allowing benchmarking of various CAD systems. This paper describes novel, deep learning based PCa CAD system that uses statistical central moments and Haralick features extracted from MR images, integrated with anamnestic data. Developed system has been trained on the dataset consisting of 330 lesions and evaluated on the challenge dataset using area under curve (AUC) related to estimated receiver operating characteristic (ROC). Two configurations of our method, based on statistical and Haralick features, scored 0.63 and 0.73 of AUC values. We draw conclusions from the challenge participation and discussed further improvements that could be made to the model to improve prostate classification.

[1]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Textural Features for Image Classification , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[2]  H. Hricak,et al.  Haralick texture analysis of prostate MRI: utility for differentiating non-cancerous prostate from prostate cancer and differentiating prostate cancers with different Gleason scores , 2015, European Radiology.

[3]  Jayaram K. Udupa,et al.  Generalized scale: Theory, algorithms, and application to image inhomogeneity correction , 2006, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[4]  Martin Styner,et al.  Parametric estimate of intensity inhomogeneities applied to MRI , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[5]  M. Giger,et al.  Quantitative analysis of multiparametric prostate MR images: differentiation between prostate cancer and normal tissue and correlation with Gleason score--a computer-aided diagnosis development study. , 2013, Radiology.

[6]  Andrew J. Vickers,et al.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 2.2016. , 2016, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[7]  Karen E. Burtt,et al.  Computer Aided-Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer on Multiparametric MRI: A Technical Review of Current Research , 2014, BioMed research international.

[8]  D. Margolis,et al.  PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. , 2016, European urology.

[9]  Guillaume Lemaitre,et al.  Computer-Aided Detection and diagnosis for prostate cancer based on mono and multi-parametric MRI: A review , 2015, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[10]  Reyer Zwiggelaar,et al.  Computer‐aided diagnosis: detection and localization of prostate cancer within the peripheral zone , 2016, International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering.

[11]  Anke Meyer-Bäse,et al.  Normalization of T2W-MRI prostate images using Rician a priori , 2016, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[12]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Computer-Aided Detection of Prostate Cancer in MRI , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  Joseph O. Deasy,et al.  Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  Dinesh P. Mital,et al.  Artificial neural network as classification method for prostate cancer incidence , 2017 .