Breast-Lesion Characterization using Textural Features of Quantitative Ultrasound Parametric Maps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated, for the first time, the efficacy of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) spectral parametric maps in conjunction with texture-analysis techniques to differentiate non-invasively benign versus malignant breast lesions. Ultrasound B-mode images and radiofrequency data were acquired from 78 patients with suspicious breast lesions. QUS spectral-analysis techniques were performed on radiofrequency data to generate parametric maps of mid-band fit, spectral slope, spectral intercept, spacing among scatterers, average scatterer diameter, and average acoustic concentration. Texture-analysis techniques were applied to determine imaging biomarkers consisting of mean, contrast, correlation, energy and homogeneity features of parametric maps. These biomarkers were utilized to classify benign versus malignant lesions with leave-one-patient-out cross-validation. Results were compared to histopathology findings from biopsy specimens and radiology reports on MR images to evaluate the accuracy of technique. Among the biomarkers investigated, one mean-value parameter and 14 textural features demonstrated statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two lesion types. A hybrid biomarker developed using a stepwise feature selection method could classify the legions with a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 84%, and an AUC of 0.97. Findings from this study pave the way towards adapting novel QUS-based frameworks for breast cancer screening and rapid diagnosis in clinic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".