Grayscale Color Mapping with the Mathematical Analysis of an Ultrasound Image in the Differential Diagnosis of Cystic and Solid Breast Masses

Objective. Atypical breast cysts are often quite a serious problem in noninvasive ultrasound differential diagnosis. To develop a system for automated analysis of grayscale ultrasound images, which on the principles of mathematical processing would make it possible to increase the specificity of diagnosis in this situation.

Material and methods. The authors developed the CystChecker 1.0 software package. To test this system, they used a set of 217 ultrasound images: 107 cystic (including 53 atypical lesions that were hardly differentially diagnosed by standard methods) and 110 solid (both benign and malignant) breast masses. All the masses were verified by cytology and/or histology. Visual assessment was carried out analyzing grayscale ultrasound, color/power Doppler, and elastography images.

Results. Using the system developed by the authors could correctly identify all (n = 107 (100%)) typical cysts, 107 (97.3%) of 110 solid masses, and 50 (94.3%) of 53 atypical cysts. On the contrary, the standard visual assessment provided a possibility of correctly identifying all (n = 107 (100%)) typical cysts, 96 (87.3%) of 110 solid masses, and 32 (60.4%) of 53 atypical cysts (p < 0.05). The corresponding values of the overall specificity of automated and visual assessments were 98 and 87%, respectively.

Conclusion. Using the system developed by the authors for automated analysis provides a higher specificity than the visual assessment of an ultrasound image, which is carried out by a qualified specialist.

1. Siegel R.L., Miller K.D., Jemal A. Cancer statistics. Cancer J. Clin. 2016; 66 (1): 7–30. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21332

2. Kaprin A.D., Starinskiy V.V., Petrova G.V. State of cancer care in Russia in 2016. Moscow; 2017 (in Russ.).

3. Nelson H.D., Fu R., Cantor A., Pappas M., Daeges M., Humphrey L. Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation. Ann. Intern. Med. 2016; 164 (4): 244–55. DOI: 10.7326/M15-0969

4. Carney P.A., Miglioretti D.L., Yankaskas B.C., Kerlikowske K., Rosenberg R., Rutter C.M. et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann. Intern. Med. 2003; 138 (3): 168–75.

5. Thigpen D., Kappler A., Brem R. The role of ultrasound in screening dense breasts – a review of the literature and practical solutions for implementation. Diagnostics (Basel). 2018; 8 (1): 20. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics8010020

6. Weigel S., Heindel W., Heidrich J., Hense H.W., Heidinger O. Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density. Eur. Radiol. 2017; 27: 2744. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4636-4

7. Vacek P.M., Geller B.M. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2004; 13 (5): 715–22.

8. Kerlikowske K., Hubbard R.A., Miglioretti D.L., Geller B.M., Yankaskas B.C., Lehman C.D. et al. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann. Intern. Med. 2011; 155 (8): 493–502. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8201110180-00005

9. Stout N.K., Lee S.J., Schechter C.B., Kerlikowske K., Alagoz O., Berry D. et al. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014; 106 (6). DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju092

10. Svahn T.M., Chakraborty D.P., Ikeda D., Zackrisson S., Do Y., Mattsson S. et al. Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of diagnostic accuracy. Br. J. Radiol. 2012; 85 (1019): e1074-e1082. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/53282892

11. Freer P.E. Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. Radiographics. 2015; 35 (2): 302–15. DOI: 10.1148/rg.352140106

12. Tice J.A., Ollendorf D.A., Lee J.M., Pearson S.D. The comparative clinical effectiveness and value of supplemental screening tests following negative mammography in women with dense breast tissue. Available at: http://www.ctaf.org/sites/default/files/assessments/ctaf-final-report-dense-breastimaging-11.04.2013-b.pdf (accessed March 7, 2014).

13. Berg W.A., Zhang Z., Lehrer D., Jong R.A., Pisano E.D., Barr R.G. et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single + screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA. 2012; 307 (13): 1394–404. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.388

14. Pasynkov D.V., Kliouchkin I.V., Pasynkova O. Value of ultrasonic breast screening in women with fibrocystic disease. Eur. Rad. 2008; 18 (Suppl. 1): 362.

15. Kim S.-Y., Kim M.J., Moon H.J., Yoon J.H., Kim E.-K. Application of the downgrade criteria to supplemental screening ultrasound for women with negative mammography but dense breasts. Medicine. 2016; 95 (44): e5279. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005279

16. Pasynkov D.V., Klyushkin I.V., Pasynkova O.O. Informative value of visual analysis of radiologic gray-scale images. Bulletin of Contemporary Clinical Medicine. 2018; 11 (5): 69–73 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.20969/VSKM.2018.11(5).69-73

17. Egoshin I., Pasynkov D., Kolchev A., Kliouchkin I., Pasynkova O. Automatic differentiation cystic and solid breast lesions at ultrasonic images. Int. J. Comp. Ass. Radiol. Surg. 2018; 131 (1): S255.

18. Houssami N., Irwig L., Ung O. Review of complex breast cyst: Implications for cancer detection and clinical practice. ANZ, Surg, 2005; 1080–5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2005.03608.x

19. Venta L.A., Kim J.P., Pelloski C.E., Morrow M. Management of complex breast cysts. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1999; 173: 1331–6. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.173.5.10541113

20. Mendelson E.B., Baum J.K., Berg W.A., Merritt C.R.B., Rubin E. Breast imaging reporting and data system, BI-RADS: ultrasound. 1 st ed. Reston (VA): College of Radiology; 2003.

21. Berg W.A., Campassi C.I., Ioffe O.B. Cystic lesions of the breast: sonographic-pathologic correlation. Radiology. 2003; 227 (1): 183–91. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2272020660

22. Doshi D.J., March D.E., Coughlin B.F., Crisi G.M. Accuracy of ultrasound-guided percutaneous biopsy of complex cystic breast masses (abstract). In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Oak Brook, ILL: Radiological Society of North America. 2006; 655.

23. Balleyguiera C., Ciolovana L., Ammaria S., Canalea S., Sethoma S. Al Rouhbanea R. et al. Diagnostic and interventional imaging breast elastography: the technical process and its applications. Diagn. Interv. Imag. 2013; 94 (5): 503–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2013.01.022

24. Busilacchi P., Draghi F., Preda L., Ferranti C. Has color Doppler a role in the evaluation of mammary lesions? J. Ultrasound. 2012; 15 (2): 93–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jus.2012.02.007