Machine learning for diagnostic ultrasound of triple-negative breast cancer

PurposeEarly diagnosis of triple-negative (TN) breast cancer is important due to its aggressive biological characteristics, poor clinical outcomes, and limited options for therapy. The goal of this study is to evaluate the potential of machine learning with quantitative ultrasound image features for the diagnosis of TN breast cancer.MethodsUltrasonic and clinical data of 140 surgically confirmed breast cancer cases were analyzed retrospectively for the diagnosis of TN and non-TN (NTN) subtypes. The subtypes were classified based on the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Ultrasound image features were measured from the grayscale and color Doppler images and used with logistic regression for classification by machine learning. Leave-one-out cross validation was used to train and test the differentiation. Diagnostic performance was measured by the area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and sensitivity and specificity determined at the Youdons index.ResultsOf the twelve grayscale and Doppler features measured, eight were found to be statistically different for the TN and NTN subtypes (p < 0.05). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the statistically significant grayscale (GS) and color Doppler (CD) features was 0.85 and 0.65, respectively. The AUC increased to 0.88 when the GS and CD features were used together, with sensitivity of 86.96% and specificity of 82.91%. Consideration of patient age in the analysis did not improve discrimination of TN and NTN.ConclusionsThe analysis of breast ultrasound images by machine learning achieves high level of differentiation between the TN and NTN subtypes, exceeding the diagnostic performance by standard visual assessments of the images.

[1]  Rebecca L. Siegel Mph,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2018 , 2018 .

[2]  H. Tsunoda,et al.  Mammography and ultrasound features of triple-negative breast cancer , 2011, Breast cancer.

[3]  Ying Wang,et al.  Identifying ultrasound and clinical features of breast cancer molecular subtypes by ensemble decision , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[4]  C. Perou,et al.  The Triple Negative Paradox: Primary Tumor Chemosensitivity of Breast Cancer Subtypes , 2007, Clinical Cancer Research.

[5]  V. Brouste,et al.  Triple-negative breast cancers: associations between imaging and pathological findings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast cancers. , 2013, The oncologist.

[6]  Anne E Carpenter,et al.  Human tumors instigate granulin-expressing hematopoietic cells that promote malignancy by activating stromal fibroblasts in mice. , 2011, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[7]  Dan Liu,et al.  Ultrasonographic features of triple-negative breast cancer: a comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. , 2015, Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP.

[8]  L. Tanoue,et al.  The National Comprehensive Cancer Network , 1998, Cancer.

[9]  Susan M. Schultz,et al.  Computer‐Based Margin Analysis of Breast Sonography for Differentiating Malignant and Benign Masses , 2004, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[10]  C. Perou,et al.  Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013 , 2013, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[11]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global Cancer Statistics , 2011 .

[12]  W. Yang,et al.  Multimodality imaging of triple receptor-negative tumors with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. , 2008, Radiology.

[14]  Woo Kyung Moon,et al.  Comparison of Ultrasound Elastography and Color Doppler Ultrasonography for Distinguishing Small Triple‐Negative Breast Cancer From Fibroadenoma , 2018, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[15]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics, 2012 , 2015, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[16]  E. Mohammadi,et al.  Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of a physiological track and trigger system: A systematic review of the qualitative evidence , 2017, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[17]  L. Turnbull,et al.  Imaging of triple-negative breast cancer. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[18]  E. Voest,et al.  Are tumours angiogenesis‐dependent? , 2004, The Journal of pathology.

[19]  Jia-wei Li,et al.  Triple-negative invasive breast carcinoma: the association between the sonographic appearances with clinicopathological feature , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[20]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Clinicopathological characteristics of triple-negative breast cancers , 2009, Breast cancer.

[21]  Charles M. Perou,et al.  Deconstructing the molecular portraits of breast cancer , 2010, Molecular oncology.

[22]  A. Stavros,et al.  Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. , 1995, Radiology.

[23]  Nisreen I. R. Yassin,et al.  Machine learning techniques for breast cancer computer aided diagnosis using different image modalities: A systematic review , 2018, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[24]  Chung-Han Lee,et al.  Mammography and ultrasound features of triple-negative breast cancer , 2011 .

[25]  Ruey-Feng Chang,et al.  Computer-Aided tumor diagnosis in 3-D breast elastography , 2018, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[26]  C. Sehgal,et al.  Combined Naïve Bayes and logistic regression for quantitative breast sonography , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium.

[27]  R. Cress,et al.  Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)‐negative, progesterone receptor (PR)‐negative, and HER2‐negative invasive breast cancer, the so‐called triple‐negative phenotype , 2007, Cancer.

[28]  E. Conant,et al.  A Review of Breast Ultrasound , 2006, Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia.

[29]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2016 , 2016, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[30]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics , 2011, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[31]  E. Lerma,et al.  Immunohistochemical heterogeneity of breast carcinomas negative for estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors and Her2/neu (basal-like breast carcinomas) , 2007, Modern Pathology.

[32]  S. Wojcinski,et al.  Sonographic Features of Triple‐Negative and Non–Triple‐Negative Breast Cancer , 2012, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[33]  Alyssa Cwanger,et al.  Bayesian Probability of Malignancy With BI‐RADS Sonographic Features , 2014, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[34]  Eun Sook Ko,et al.  Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between imaging and pathological findings , 2010, European Radiology.

[35]  E. Winer,et al.  Clinicopathologic features, patterns of recurrence, and survival among women with triple‐negative breast cancer in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network , 2012, Cancer.

[36]  P. Belli,et al.  Association between sonographic appearances of breast cancers and their histopathologic features and biomarkers , 2016, Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU.

[37]  Ga Young Yoon,et al.  Sonographic features that can be used to differentiate between small triple-negative breast cancer and fibroadenoma , 2017, Ultrasonography.

[38]  B. Son,et al.  Correlation between mammographic and sonographic findings and prognostic factors in patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer. , 2011, The British journal of radiology.

[39]  Susan M. Schultz,et al.  Vascularity assessment of thyroid nodules by quantitative color Doppler ultrasound. , 2015, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[40]  E. Conant,et al.  Quantitative vascularity of breast masses by Doppler imaging: regional variations and diagnostic implications. , 2000, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[41]  C. Balleyguier,et al.  Computed-aided diagnosis (CAD) in the detection of breast cancer. , 2013, European journal of radiology.

[42]  Du-Ping Huang,et al.  Ultrasonographic findings of triple-negative breast cancer. , 2015, International journal of clinical and experimental medicine.

[43]  R. Kumar,et al.  The role of HER2 in angiogenesis. , 2001, Seminars in oncology.

[44]  Yongyi Yang,et al.  Computer-Aided Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer With Mammography: Recent Advances , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine.

[45]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2018 , 2018, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[46]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Mammographic features of triple receptor-negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal women , 2008, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[47]  M. Helvie,et al.  Triple receptor-negative breast cancer: imaging and clinical characteristics. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[48]  Susan M. Schultz,et al.  The diagnostic performance of leak-plugging automated segmentation versus manual tracing of breast lesions on ultrasound images , 2017, Ultrasound.

[49]  B. Ljung,et al.  Immunolocalization of a human basal epithelium specific keratin in benign and malignant breast disease , 1987, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.