Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Author(s): Yingni Wang, Xiaona Lin, Xuesheng Zhang, Qingyu Ye, Haiying Zhou, Renrong Zhang, Shuang Ge, Desheng Sun* and Kehong Yuan*

DOI: 10.2174/1573405618666220420091649

DownloadDownload PDF Flyer Cite As
Improved FCOS for Detecting Breast Cancers

Article ID: e200422203819 Pages: 11

  • * (Excluding Mailing and Handling)

Abstract

Purpose: Breast cancer ranks first among cancers affecting women's health. Our goal is to develop a fast, high-precision, and fully automated breast cancer detection algorithm to improve the early detection rate of breast cancer.

Methods: We compare different object detection algorithms, including anchor-based and anchor-free object detection algorithms for detecting breast lesions. Finally, we find that the fully convolutional onestage object detection (FCOS) showed the best performance in the detection of breast lesions, which is an anchor-free algorithm. 1) Considering that the detection of breast lesions requires the context information of the ultrasound images, we introduce the non-local technique, which models long-range dependency between pixels to the FCOS algorithm, providing the global context information for the detection of the breast lesions. 2) The variety of shapes and sizes of breast lesions makes detection difficult. We propose a new deformable spatial attention (DSA) module and add it to the FCOS algorithm.

Results: The detection performance of the original FCOS is that the average precision (AP) for benign lesions is 0.818, and for malignant lesions is 0.888. The FCOS with a non-local module improves the performance of the breast detection; the AP of benign lesions was 0.819, and that of malignant lesions was 0.894. Combining the DSA module with the FCOS improves the performance of breast detection; the AP for benign lesions and malignant lesions is 0.840 and 0.899, respectively.

Conclusion: We propose two methods to improve the FCOS algorithm from different perspectives to improve its performance in detecting breast lesions. We find that FCOS combined with DSA is beneficial in improving the localization and classification of breast tumors and can provide auxiliary diagnostic advice for ultrasound physicians, which has a certain clinical application value.

Keywords: Object detection algorithm, breast cancers, non-local module, deformable spatial attention, FCOS, ultrasound.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(3): 209-49.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660] [PMID: 33538338]
[2]
Cheng HD, Shan J, Ju W, et al. Automated breast cancer detection and classification using ultrasound images: A survey. Pattern Recognit 2010; 43: 299-317.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2009.05.012]
[3]
Zhang LN, Li S, Zheng XY, et al. Advantages and disadvantages of the X-ray and ultrasound examination for breast cancer diagnosis. Zhongguo Yike Daxue Xuebao 2010; 39: 485-6.
[4]
Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. Solid breast nodules: Use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196(1): 123-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.196.1.7784555] [PMID: 7784555]
[5]
Ren S, He K, Girshick R, Sun J. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2015; 28: 91-9.
[6]
Redmon J, Farhadi A. Yolov3: An incremental improvement. arXiv 2018.
[7]
Liu W, Anguelov D, Erhan D, et al. Single shot multibox detector. In: Leibe B, Matas J, Sebe N, Welling M, Eds. Computer vision. Cham: Springer 2016; pp. 21-37.
[8]
Lin TY, Goyal P, Girshick R, He K, Dollar P. Focal loss for dense object detection. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2017 Oct 22-29; Venice, Italy. 2980-8.
[9]
Zhou X, Wang D, Krähenbühl P. Objects as points. arXiv 2019.
[10]
Tian Z, Shen C, Chen H, He T. Fcos: Fully convolutional one-stage object detection. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2019 Oct 27-Nov 2; Seoul, Korea (South). pp. 9627-.
[11]
Yang Z, Liu S, Hu H, Wang L, Lin S. Reppoints: Point set representation for object detection. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2019 Oct 27-Nov 2; Seoul, Korea (South). pp. 9657-.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2019.00975]
[12]
Cao Y, Xu J, Lin S, Wei F, Hu H. Gcnet: Non-local networks meet squeeze-excitation networks and beyond. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshop (ICCVW); 2019 Oct 27-28; Seoul, Korea (South).
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICCVW.2019.00246]
[13]
Wang X, Girshick R, Gupta A, He K. Non-local neural networks. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2018 Jun 18-23; Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 7794-803.
[14]
Dai J, Qi H, Xiong Y, et al. Deformable convolutional networks. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017 Oct 22-29; Venice, Italy. pp. 764-773.
[15]
Selvaraju RR, Cogswell M, Das A, Vedantam R, Parikh D, Batra D. Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017 Oct 22-29; Venice, Italy. pp. 618-26.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2017.74]
[16]
Kong T, Sun F, Liu H, Jiang Y, Li L, Shi J. Foveabox: Beyound anchor-based object detection. IEEE Trans Image Process 2020; 29: 7389-98.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2020.3002345]
[17]
Liu S, Huang D. Receptive field block net for accurate and fast object detection. In: Ferrari V, Hebert M, Sminchisescu C, Weiss Y, Eds. Computer vision – ECCV 2018. Cham: Springer 2018; pp. 385-400.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01252-6_24]
[18]
Girshick R, Donahue J, Darrell T, Malik J. Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation. In: 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2014 Jun 23-28; Columbus, OH, USA. pp. 580-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2014.81]
[19]
Lin TY, Dollár P, Girshick R, He K, Hariharan B, Belongie S. Feature pyramid networks for object detection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2017 Jul 21-26; Honolulu, HI, USA. pp. 2117-.
[20]
He K, Gkioxari G, Dollár P, Girshick R. Mask r-cnn. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017 Oct 22-29; Venice, Italy. pp. 2961-.
[21]
Han G, Liu X, Han F, et al. The LISS-a public database of common imaging signs of lung diseases for computer-aided detection and diagnosis research and medical education. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2015; 62(2): 648-56.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2014.2363131] [PMID: 25330480]
[22]
Singh B, Davis LS. An analysis of scale invariance in object detection snip. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2018 Jun 18-23; Salt Lake City, UT, USA. pp. 3578-.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00377]
[23]
Law H, Deng J. Cornernet: Detecting objects as paired keypoints. In: Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV); 2018 Sep 8-14; Munich, Germany. pp. 734-50.
[24]
Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2017; 5998-6008.
[25]
Woo S, Park J, Lee JY, Kweon IS. Cbam: Convolutional block attention module. In: Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV); 2018 Sep 8-14; Munich, Germany. pp. 3-19.
[26]
Cai Z, Vasconcelos N. Cascade r-cnn: Delving into high quality object detection. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2018 Jun 18-23; Salt Lake City, UT, USA. pp. 6154-.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00644]
[27]
Zhang S, Chi C, Yao Y, Lei Z, Li SZ. Bridging the gap between anchor-based and anchor-free detection via adaptive training sample selection. In: 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2020 Jun 13-19; Seattle, WA, USA. pp. 9759-.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.00978]