Cited by 358AI in cancer detectionRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingMedical Image Segmentation Techniques

A deep learning framework for supporting the classification of breast lesions in ultrasound images

Open access
Han, Seokmin, Kang, Ho-Kyung, Jeong, Ja-Yeon, Park, Moon-Ho, Kim, Wonsik, Bang, Won-Chul, Seong, Yeong-Kyeong·2017·Physics in Medicine & Biology

Abstract

In this research, we exploited the deep learning framework to differentiate the distinctive types of lesions and nodules in breast acquired with ultrasound imaging. A biopsy-proven benchmarking dataset was built from 5151 patients cases containing a total of 7408 ultrasound breast images, representative of semi-automatically segmented lesions associated with masses. The dataset comprised 4254 benign and 3154 malignant lesions. The developed method includes histogram equalization, image cropping and margin augmentation. The GoogLeNet convolutionary neural network was trained to the database to differentiate benign and malignant tumors. The networks were trained on the data with augmentation and the data without augmentation. Both of them showed an area under the curve of over 0.9. The networks showed an accuracy of about 0.9 (90%), a sensitivity of 0.86 and a specificity of 0.96. Although target regions of interest (ROIs) were selected by radiologists, meaning that radiologists still have to point out the location of the ROI, the classification of malignant lesions showed promising results. If this method is used by radiologists in clinical situations it can classify malignant lesions in a short time and support the diagnosis of radiologists in discriminating malignant lesions. Therefore, the proposed method can work in tandem with human radiologists to improve performance, which is a fundamental purpose of computer-aided diagnosis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1361-6560/aa82ec

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • SDAE, PGBM combined with RBM, and GoogLeNet CNN applied to breast US or shear-wave elastography images for breast cancer diagnosis obtained superior performance compared with human experts.

    “In addition, the stacked denoising auto-encoder (SDAE) [88], a combination of the point-wise gated Boltzmann machine (PGBM) and RBM [89], and the GoogLeNet CNN [90] have been applied to breast US or shear-wave elastography images for breast cancer diagnosis; all of these obtained a superior performance when compared with human experts.”

    From Deep Learning in Medical Ultrasound Analysis: A Review (2019) · cites this paper as [90]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 71 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Han, S., Kang, H.-K., Jeong, J.-Y., Park, M.-H., Kim, W., Bang, W.-C., & Seong, Y.-K.
Affiliations
  • Korea National University of Transportation (KR)
  • Samsung Electronics (South Korea) (KR)
Corresponding author
Seong, Yeong-Kyeong
Venue
Physics in Medicine & Biology
Published
2017-09-15
Volume
62
Issue
19
Pages
7714-7728
ISSN
  • 0031-9155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6560
OpenAlex
W2740028789
Cited by
358
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 13
FWCI
16.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physics in Medicine and Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
Keywords
breast ultrasound, breast lesion classification, benign versus malignant tumors, computer-aided diagnosis, GoogLeNet, convolutional neural networks, image augmentation
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Breast Neoplasms, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Middle Aged, ROC Curve, Ultrasonography, Mammary, Neural Networks, Computer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review