Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 7 , Pages 842-851 , July 2009

Prediction of Malignant Breast Lesions from MRI Features: A Comparison of Artificial Neural Network and Logistic Regression Techniques

Received 4 November 2008 ,Accepted 23 January 2009.

References 

  1. Chen W, Giger ML, 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
  2. Chen W, Giger ML, Bick U, et al. Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI. Med Phys. 2006;33:2878–2887
  3. Chen W, Giger ML, Lan L, et al. Computerized interpretation of breast MRI: investigation of enhancement-variance dynamics. Med Phys. 2004;31:1076–1082
  4. Liney GP, Sreenivas M, Gibbs P, et al. Breast lesion analysis of shape technique: semiautomated vs. manual morphological description. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:493–498
  5. Meinel LA, Stolpen AH, Berbaum KS, et al. Breast MRI lesion classification: improved performance of human readers with a backpropagation neural network computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;25:89–95
  6. Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, et al. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:110–119
  7. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology. 1999;213:881–888
  8. Mumtaz H, Hall-Craggs MA, Davidson T, et al. Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:417–424
  9. Rieber A, Schirrmeister H, Gabelmann A, et al. Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or PET: boon or bunk?. Br J Radiol. 2002;75:789–798
  10. Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004;30:501–507
  11. Zhang Y, Fukatsu H, Naganawa S, et al. The role of contrast-enhanced MR mammography for determining candidates for breast conservation surgery. Breast Cancer. 2002;9:231–239
  12. Gilhuijs KG, Giger ML, Bick U. Computerized analysis of breast lesions in three dimensions using dynamic magnetic-resonance imaging. Med Phys. 1998;25:1647–1654
  13. Chou YH, Tiu CM, Hung GS, et al. Stepwise logistic regression analysis of tumor contour features for breast ultrasound diagnosis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;27:1493–1498
  14. Chan HP, Sahiner B, Petrick N, et al. Computerized classification of malignant and benign microcalcifications on mammograms: texture analysis using an artificial neural network. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:549–567
  15. Sargent DJ. Comparison of artificial neural networks with other statistical approaches. Cancer. 2001;91:1636–1642
  16. Tu JV. Advantages and disadvantages of using artificial neural networks versus logistic regression for predicting medical outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1225–1231
  17. Song JH, Venkatesh SS, Conant EA, et al. Comparative analysis of logistic regression and artificial neural network for computer-aided diagnosis of beast masses. Acad Radiol. 2005;12:487–495
  18. Nie K, Chen J-H, Yu HJ, et al. Quantitative analysis of lesion morphology and texture features for diagnostic prediction in breast MRI. Acad Radiol. 2008;15:1513–1525
  19. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I. Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern. 1973;SMC-3: 610–621
  20. Laws KI. Rapid texture identification. In: Image processing for missile guidance. San Diego, CA: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers; 1980;p. 376–380
  21. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991;
  22. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–845
  23. Puri ML, Sen PK. Nonparametric methods in multivariate analysis. New York: John Wiley; 1971;
  24. Neter J, Kutner M, Nachtsheim C, et al. Applied linear statistical models. New York: WCB McGraw-Hill; 1996;
  25. Harrell FE, Cadiff RM, Pryor DB, et al. Evaluating the yield of medical tests. JAMA. 1982;247:2543–2546
  26. Spitz MR, Hong WK, Amos CI, et al. A risk model for prediction of lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:715–726
  27. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York: John Wiley; 1989;
  28. Nagelkerke NJD. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika. 1991;78:691–692
  29. Nilsson J, Ohlsson M, Thulin L, et al. Risk factor identification and mortality prediction in cardiac surgery using artificial neural networks. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132:12–19
  30. Clermont G, Angus DC, DiRusso SM, et al. Predicting hospital mortality for patients in the intensive care unit: a comparison of artificial neural networks with logistic regression models. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:291–296
  31. Delen D, Walker G, Kadam A. Predicting breast cancer survivability: a comparison of three data mining methods. Artif Intell Med. 2005;34:113–127
  32. Jaimes F, Farbiarz J, Alvarez D, et al. Comparison between logistic regression and neural networks to predict death in patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency room. Crit Care. 2005;9:R150–R156
  33. Lundin M, Lundin J, Burke HB, et al. Artificial neural networks applied to survival prediction in breast cancer. Oncology. 1999;57:281–286
  34. Kohavi R. A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 1995;p. 1137–1143
  35. Terrin N, Schmid CH, Griffith JL, et al. External validity of predictive models: a comparison of logistic regression, classification trees, and neural networks. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:721–729
  36. Efron B. Estimating the error rate of a prediction rule: improvement on cross-validation. J Am Stat Assoc. 1983;78:316–331
  37. Breiman L, Spector P. Submodel selection and evaluation in regression. The X-random case. Int Stat Rev. 1992;60:291–319
  38. Martens H, Næs T. Multivariate calibration. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 1989;
  39. Næs T, Mevik B-H. Understanding the collinearity problem in regression and discriminant analysis. J Chemometr. 2001;15:413–426
  40. Weisberg S. Applied linear regression. New York: John Wiley; 1985;

 This work was supported in part by grant R01 CA90437 (O. Nalcioglu) and R21 CA121568 (M.-Y.Su) from the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD), grants 9WB-0020 (M.-Y. Su) and 14GB-0148 (K. Nie) from the California Breast Cancer Research Program (Oakland, CA), and Cancer Center Support Grant No. 2P30CA062203-13S (F.L. Meyskens, Jr) from the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD).

PII: S1076-6332(09)00134-2

doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.01.029

Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 7 , Pages 842-851 , July 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution