Utility of U-Net for the objective segmentation of the fibroglandular tissue region on clinical digital mammograms. (1st July 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yamamuro, Mika; Asai, Yoshiyuki; Hashimoto, Naomi; Yasuda, Nao; Kimura, Hiorto; Yamada, Takahiro; Nemoto, Mitsutaka; Kimura, Yuichi; Handa, Hisashi; Yoshida, Hisashi; Abe, Koji; Tada, Masahiro; Habe, Hitoshi; Nagaoka, Takashi; Nin, Seiun; Ishii, Kazunari; Kondo, Yohan
• Is Part Of: Biomedical physics & engineering express. Volume 8:Number 4(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-07-01
• Subjects: U-Net -- segmentation -- breast density -- mean glandular dose -- digital mammogram -- fibroglandular tissue; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Biomedical engineering -- Periodicals; Medical sciences -- Periodicals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac7ada
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2057-1976

Abstract

Abstract: This study investigates the equivalence or compatibility between U-Net and visual segmentations of fibroglandular tissue regions by mammography experts for calculating the breast density and mean glandular dose (MGD). A total of 703 mediolateral oblique-view mammograms were used for segmentation. Two region types were set as the ground truth (determined visually): (1) one type included only the region where fibroglandular tissue was identifiable (called the 'dense region'); (2) the other type included the region where the fibroglandular tissue may have existed in the past, provided that apparent adipose-only parts, such as the retromammary space, are excluded (the 'diffuse region'). U-Net was trained to segment the fibroglandular tissue region with an adaptive moment estimation optimiser, five-fold cross-validated with 400 training and 100 validation mammograms, and tested with 203 mammograms. The breast density and MGD were calculated using the van Engeland and Dance formulas, respectively, and compared between U-Net and the ground truth with the Dice similarity coefficient and Bland–Altman analysis. Dice similarity coefficients between U-Net and the ground truth were 0.895 and 0.939 for the dense and diffuse regions, respectively. In the Bland–Altman analysis, no proportional or fixed errors were discovered in either the dense or diffuse region for breast density, whereas a slight proportional error was discovered in both regions for the MGD (the slopes of the regression lines were −0.0299 and −0.0443 for the dense and diffuse regions, respectively). Consequently, the U-Net and ground truth were deemed equivalent (interchangeable) for breast density and compatible (interchangeable following four simple arithmetic operations) for MGD. U-Net-based segmentation of the fibroglandular tissue region was satisfactory for both regions, providing reliable segmentation for breast density and MGD calculations. U-Net will be useful in developing a reliable individualised screening-mammography programme, instead of relying on the visual judgement of mammography experts.