A Quantitative Method for Differentiating Malignant and Benign Pulmonary Nodules

Abstract:

It is common sense that CAD has great significance in the lung nodule detection. But it is still controversial whether the CAD can also automatically differentiates between malignant and benign pulmonary nodules. The primary cause of this controversy is due to the subjective definition of 9 characteristics of nodules which are important basis of nodule identification. In other word, these characteristics are too dependent on the doctor scoring, and no objective standard of them has built which make these characteristics can be obtained by calculation.The main aim of this paper is to establish a quantitative method of the characteristics and refine these nine characteristics. This new method is used to find the objective replacement (a series features which can be measured through algorithms) of these subjective characteristics of the pulmonary nodule detection with Bayesian analysis.The experiment of our method proves that it is feasible to substitute the features of Pulmonary Nodule obtained by calculating for the characteristics of the nodule which only used to be gotten by the subjective judgment of doctors.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 513-517)
• Pages: 3830-3834
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.513-517.3830
• Online since: February 2014
• Authors: Yu Zhao*, Sheng Dong Nie, Jie Wu, Yuan Jun Wang
• Keywords: Characteristic, Differentiating between Malignancy and Benignity, Feature Extraction, Quantitative Method

References

[1] Lee S.L. A, Kouzan.A. Z, Hu.E. J, Automated detection of lung nodules in computed tomography imagesa review, , Machine Vision and Applications, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2010, pp.151-163.

DOI: 10.1007/s00138-010-0271-2

[2] Temesguen. Messay, Russell.C. Hardie, Steven.K. Rogers, A new computationally efficient CAD system for pulmonary nodule detectioin CT imagery, , Medical Image Analysis, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2010, pp.390-406.

DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2010.02.004

[3] Meindert. Niemeijer, Marco. Loog, Michael. David, et al, On Combining Computer-Aided Detection Systems, , IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2011, pp.215-223.

DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2010.2072789

[4] B. de Hoop D.W. De Boo H, et al, Computer- aided detection of lung cancer on chest radiographs: effect on observer performance radiology, Radiology, Vol. 257, No. 1, 2011, pp.532-540.

DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10092437

[5] J. Kittler, M. Hatef, R.P.W. Duin, J. Matas, On combining classifiers, , IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell, Vol. 20, No. 3, 1998, p.226–239.

DOI: 10.1109/34.667881

[6] Metin.N. Gurcan , Berkman. Sahiner , et al. Lung nodule detection on thoracic computed tomography images: Preliminary evaluation of a computer-aided diagnosis system, Medical Physics , Vol. 29, No. 11, 2002, pp.3489-3491.

DOI: 10.1118/1.1515762

[7] Pia Opulencia, David S. Channin, et al. Mapping LIDC, RadLex, and Lung Nodule Image Features, Journal of Digital Imaging, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2011, pp.256-270.

DOI: 10.1007/s10278-010-9285-6

[8] Armato III, SG, McNitt-Gray MF, et al. The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): An evaluation of radiologist variability in the identification of lung nodules on CT scans, Acad Radiol, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2007, p.1409.

DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2007.07.008

[9] Claudia I. Henschke, David F. Yankelevitz, et al. CT Screening for Lung Cancer Frequency and Significance of Part-Solid and Nonsolid Nodules, , AJR, Vol. 178, No. 5, 2002, pp.1053-1057.

DOI: 10.2214/ajr.178.5.1781053

[10] James Berger. The case for objective Bayesian analysis, , Bayesian Anal, Vol. 1, No. 3, 2006, pp.385-402.