Cited by 246Image Retrieval and Classification TechniquesBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Content-based brain tumor retrieval for MR images using transfer learning

Open access
Swati, Zar Nawab Khan, Zhao, Qinghua, Kabir, Muhammad, Ali, Farman, Ali, Zakir, Ahmed, Saeed, Lu, Jianfeng·2019·IEEE Access

Abstract

This paper presents an automatic content-based image retrieval (CBIR) system for brain tumors on T1-weighted contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images (CE-MRI). The key challenge in CBIR systems for MR images is the semantic gap between the low-level visual information captured by the MRI machine and the high-level information perceived by the human evaluator. The traditional feature extraction methods focus only on low-level or high-level features and use some handcrafted features to reduce this gap. It is necessary to design a feature extraction framework to reduce this gap without using handcrafted features by encoding/combining low-level and high-level features. Deep learning is very powerful for feature representation that can depict low-level and high-level information completely and embed the phase of feature extraction in self-learning. Therefore, we propose a deep convolutional neural network VGG19-based novel feature extraction framework and apply closed-form metric learning to measure the similarity between the query image and database images. Furthermore, we adopt transfer learning and propose a block-wise fine-tuning strategy to enhance the retrieval performance. The extensive experiments are performed on a publicly available CE-MRI dataset that consists of three types of brain tumors (i.e., glioma, meningioma, and pituitary tumor) collected from 233 patients with a total of 3064 images across the axial, coronal, and sagittal views. Our method is more generic, as we do not use any handcrafted features; it requires minimal preprocessing, tested as robust on fivefold cross-validation, can achieve a fivefold mean average precision of 96.13%, and outperforms the state-of-the-art CBIR systems on the CE-MRI dataset.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2019.2892455

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swati, Z. N. K., Zhao, Q., Kabir, M., Ali, F., Ali, Z., Ahmed, S., & Lu, J.
Affiliations
  • Nanjing University of Science and Technology (CN)
  • Nanjing University of Finance and Economics (CN)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2019
Volume
7
Pages
17809-17822
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2910541852
Cited by
246
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 4
FWCI
12.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFB1004)
  • 111 Project (B13022)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (20131351)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
content-based image retrieval, brain tumors, contrast-enhanced MRI, transfer learning, VGG19, metric learning, semantic gap, feature extraction, glioma, meningioma, pituitary tumors

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