Objective: To assess the similarity and differences of radiomics features on full field digital mammography (FFDM) in FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION data. Methods: 165 consecutive women who underwent FFDM were included. Breasts have been segmented into “dense” and “non-dense” area using the software LIBRA. Segmentation of both FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION images have been evaluated by Bland–Altman, Dice index and Cohen’s kappa analysis. 74 textural features were computed: 18 features of First Order (FO), 24 features of Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM), 16 features of Gray Level Run Length Matrix (GLRLM) and 16 features of Gray Level Size Zone Matrix (GLSZM). Paired Wilcoxon test, Spearman’s rank correlation, intraclass correlation and canonical correlation have been used. Bilateral symmetry and percent density (PD) were also evaluated. Results: Segmentation from FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION gave very different results. Bilateral symmetry was higher when evaluated on features computed using FOR PROCESSING images. All features showed a positive Spearman’s correlation coefficient and many FOR-PROCESSING features were moderately or strongly correlated to their corresponding FOR-PRESENTATION counterpart. As regards the correlation analysis between PD and textural features from FOR-PRESENTATION a moderate correlation was obtained only for Gray Level Non Uniformity from GLRLM both on “dense” and “non dense” area; as regards correlation between PD and features from FOR-PROCESSING a moderate correlation was observed only for Maximal Correlation Coefficient from GLCM both on “dense” and “non dense” area. Conclusions: Texture features from FOR PROCESSING mammograms seem to be most suitable for assessing breast density.

Radiomic features of breast parenchyma: assessing differences between FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION digital mammography / Sansone, M.; Grassi, R.; Belfiore, M. P.; Gatta, G.; Grassi, F.; Pinto, F.; La Casella, G. V.; Fusco, R.; Cappabianca, S.; Granata, V.; Grassi, R.. - In: INSIGHTS INTO IMAGING. - ISSN 1869-4101. - 12:1(2021), p. 147. [10.1186/s13244-021-01093-4]

Radiomic features of breast parenchyma: assessing differences between FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION digital mammography

Sansone M.
;
2021

Abstract

Objective: To assess the similarity and differences of radiomics features on full field digital mammography (FFDM) in FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION data. Methods: 165 consecutive women who underwent FFDM were included. Breasts have been segmented into “dense” and “non-dense” area using the software LIBRA. Segmentation of both FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION images have been evaluated by Bland–Altman, Dice index and Cohen’s kappa analysis. 74 textural features were computed: 18 features of First Order (FO), 24 features of Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM), 16 features of Gray Level Run Length Matrix (GLRLM) and 16 features of Gray Level Size Zone Matrix (GLSZM). Paired Wilcoxon test, Spearman’s rank correlation, intraclass correlation and canonical correlation have been used. Bilateral symmetry and percent density (PD) were also evaluated. Results: Segmentation from FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION gave very different results. Bilateral symmetry was higher when evaluated on features computed using FOR PROCESSING images. All features showed a positive Spearman’s correlation coefficient and many FOR-PROCESSING features were moderately or strongly correlated to their corresponding FOR-PRESENTATION counterpart. As regards the correlation analysis between PD and textural features from FOR-PRESENTATION a moderate correlation was obtained only for Gray Level Non Uniformity from GLRLM both on “dense” and “non dense” area; as regards correlation between PD and features from FOR-PROCESSING a moderate correlation was observed only for Maximal Correlation Coefficient from GLCM both on “dense” and “non dense” area. Conclusions: Texture features from FOR PROCESSING mammograms seem to be most suitable for assessing breast density.
2021
Radiomic features of breast parenchyma: assessing differences between FOR PROCESSING and FOR PRESENTATION digital mammography / Sansone, M.; Grassi, R.; Belfiore, M. P.; Gatta, G.; Grassi, F.; Pinto, F.; La Casella, G. V.; Fusco, R.; Cappabianca, S.; Granata, V.; Grassi, R.. - In: INSIGHTS INTO IMAGING. - ISSN 1869-4101. - 12:1(2021), p. 147. [10.1186/s13244-021-01093-4]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/906313
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 13
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 9
social impact