Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/1882992.1883005acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesihiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Uncovering age-specific invasive and DCIS breast cancer rules using inductive logic programming

Published: 11 November 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer among women. Current clinical breast cancer diagnosis involves a biopsy, which is a costly, invasive and potentially painful procedure. Some researchers proposed models, based on mammography features and personal information, that help identify pre-biopsy invasive breast carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Recently, a differential discriminating ability between invasive and DCIS has been linked to age. Based on this finding, we use an age-stratified mammography and biopsy relational dataset and apply Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) techniques to learn age-specific logical rules that classify invasive and DCIS occurrences. We then use statistical modeling to retrieve rules that have a significantly different performance across age-stratas. These final rules reveal a number of interesting results. Although a palpable lump is more commonly associated with younger patients, it turns out to be a better predictor of invasive cancer in older women. A recurrence has a higher probability to be invasive in older and middle-aged women. A previously unreported rule revealed by our technique is that recurrence is more likely a DCIS predictor in younger women. This younger DCIS predicting rule effectively links the current diagnostic mammogram to older studies, and provides opposite predictions across the age divide. The resulting rules are age-specific, can help patients and their physicians make more informed decisions about managing their breast health, and constitute a personalized predictive model.

References

[1]
S. Aebi and M. Castiglione. The enigma of young age. Ann. Oncol., 17(10): 1475--1477, 2006.
[2]
C. J. Allegra, D. R. Aberle, P. Ganschow, S. M. Hahn, C. N. Lee, S. Millon- Underwood, M. C. Pike, S. Reed, A. F. Saftlas, S. A. Scarvalone, A. M. Schwartz, C. Slomski, G. Yothers, and R. Zon. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ, September 22-24, 2009. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 102(3): 161--169, 2010.
[3]
American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2009-2010. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, USA, 2009.
[4]
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2009. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, USA, 2009.
[5]
American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, USA. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADSTM), 1998.
[6]
M. Ayvaci, O. Alagoz, J. Chhatwal, M. J. Lindstrom, E. A. Sickles, H. Nassif, K. Kerlikowske, and E. S. Burnside. Determining whether age matters in predicting invasive breast cancer versus DCIS.
[7]
E. S. Burnside, J. Davis, J. Chhatwal, O. Alagoz, M. J. Lindstrom, B. M. Geller, B. Littenberg, K. A. Shaffer, C. E. Kahn, and D. Page. Probabilistic computer model developed from clinical data in national mammography database format to classify mammographic findings. Radiology, 251: 663--672, 2009.
[8]
E. S. Burnside, J. Davis, V. Santos Costa, I. de Castro Dutra, C. E. Kahn, J. Fine, and D. Page. Knowledge discovery from structured mammography reports using inductive logic programming. In AMIA Symposium Proceedings, pages 96--100, Washington, DC, 2005.
[9]
P. C. Dubsky, M. F. X. Gnant, S. Taucher, S. Roka, D. Kandioler, B. Pichler-Gebhard, I. Agstner, M. Seifert, P. Sevelda, and R. Jakesz. Young age as an independent adverse prognostic factor in premenopausal patients with breast cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer, 3: 65--72, 2002.
[10]
P. Finn, S. Muggleton, D. Page, and A. Srinivasan. Pharmacophore Discovery using the Inductive Logic Programming System PROGOL. Mach. Learn., 30: 241--273, 1998.
[11]
C. Gajdos, P. I. Tartter, I. J. Bleiweiss, C. Bodian, and S. T. Brower. Stage 0 to stage III breast cancer in young women. J. Am. Coll. Surg., 190(5): 523--529, 2000.
[12]
M. Garcia, A. Jemal, E. M. Ward, M. M. Center, Y. Hao, R. L. Siegel, and M. J. Thun. Global Cancer Facts & Figures 2007. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, USA, 2007.
[13]
C. Goutte and E. Gaussier. A probabilistic interpretation of precision, recall and F-score, with implication for evaluation. In Proc. of the 27th European Conference on IR Research, pages 345--359, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2005.
[14]
L. E. Kelemen, V. S. Pankratz, T. A. Sellers, K. R. Brandt, A. Wang, C. Janney, Z. S. Fredericksen, J. R. Cerhan, and C. M. Vachon. Age- specific trends in mammographic density. American Journal of Epidemiology, 167(9): 1027--1036, 2008.
[15]
S. H. Kim, B. K. Seo, J. Lee, S. J. Kim, K. R. Cho, K. Y. Lee, B.-K. Je, H. Y. Kim, Y.-S. Kim, and J.-H. Lee. Correlation of ultrasound findings with histology, tumor grade, and biological markers in breast cancer. Acta Oncol., 47(8):1531--1538, 2008.
[16]
N. Lavrac and S. Dzeroski. Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications. Ellis Horwood, New York, 1994.
[17]
Y. Liu, M. Pérez, M. Schootman, R. L. Aft, W. E. Gillanders, M. J. Ellis, and D. B. Jeffe. A longitudinal study of factors associated with perceived risk of recurrence in women with ductal carcinoma in situ and early-stage invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat., Epub ahead of print, 2010.
[18]
M. T. Mandelson, N. Oestreicher, P. L. Porter, D. White, C. A. Finder, S. H. Taplin, and E. White. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 92(13): 1081--1087, 2000.
[19]
R. Nakayama, Y. Uchiyama, R. Watanabe, S. Katsuragawa, K. Namba, and K. Doi. Computer-aided diagnosis scheme for histological classification of clustered microcalcifications on magnification mammograms. Med. Phys., 31(4): 789--799, 2004.
[20]
H. Nassif, H. Al-Ali, S. Khuri, W. Keirouz, and D. Page. An inductive logic programming approach to validade hexose biochemical knowledge. In Proceedings of ILP, Leuven, Belgium, 2009.
[21]
H. Nassif, R. Wood, E. S. Burnside, M. Ayvaci, J. Shavlik, and D. Page. Information extraction for clinical data mining: A mammography case study. In ICDM Workshops, pages 37--42, Miami, Florida, 2009.
[22]
V. Santos Costa. The life of a logic programming system. In M. G. de la Banda and E. Pontelli, editors, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 1--6, Udine, Italy, 2008.
[23]
A. Srinivasan. The Aleph Manual,2007. www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/activities/machinelearning/Aleph.
[24]
M. G. Thurfjell, A. Lindgren, and E. Thurfjell. Nonpalpable breast cancer: Mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology, 222(1): 165--170, 2002.
[25]
D. L. Weaver, P. M. Vacek, J. M. Skelly, and B. M. Geller. Predicting biopsy outcome after mammography: what is the likelihood the patient has invasive or in situ breast cancer? Ann. Surg. Oncol., 12(8): 660--673, 2005.
[26]
J. N. Wolfe. Breast parenchymal patterns and their changes with age. Radiology, 121: 545--552, 1976.

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)Conversion Uplift in E-Commerce: A Systematic Benchmark of Modeling StrategiesInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making10.1142/S021962201950017218:03(747-791)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2019
  • (2019)A Novel Internet of Things Framework Integrated with Real Time Monitoring for Intelligent Healthcare EnvironmentJournal of Medical Systems10.1007/s10916-019-1302-943:6(1-10)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019
  • (2016)Interpretable models to predict Breast Cancer2016 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM)10.1109/BIBM.2016.7822745(1507-1511)Online publication date: Dec-2016
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
IHI '10: Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium
November 2010
886 pages
ISBN:9781450300308
DOI:10.1145/1882992
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 November 2010

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. age-specific prediction
  2. breast cancer
  3. dcis
  4. ilp
  5. invasive
  6. rule extraction

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

IHI '10
IHI '10: ACM International Health Informatics Symposium
November 11 - 12, 2010
Virginia, Arlington, USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)Conversion Uplift in E-Commerce: A Systematic Benchmark of Modeling StrategiesInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making10.1142/S021962201950017218:03(747-791)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2019
  • (2019)A Novel Internet of Things Framework Integrated with Real Time Monitoring for Intelligent Healthcare EnvironmentJournal of Medical Systems10.1007/s10916-019-1302-943:6(1-10)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019
  • (2016)Interpretable models to predict Breast Cancer2016 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM)10.1109/BIBM.2016.7822745(1507-1511)Online publication date: Dec-2016
  • (2013)Using machine learning to identify benign cases with non-definitive biopsy2013 IEEE 15th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom 2013)10.1109/HealthCom.2013.6720685(283-285)Online publication date: Oct-2013
  • (2013)Score As You Lift (SAYL)Proceedings of the 2013th European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases - Volume Part III10.1007/978-3-642-40994-3_38(595-611)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2013
  • (2013)A Counting-Based Heuristic for ILP-Based Concept Discovery SystemsHybrid Artificial Intelligent Systems10.1007/978-3-642-40846-5_18(171-180)Online publication date: 2013
  • (2012)Relational Differential PredictionMachine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases10.1007/978-3-642-33460-3_45(617-632)Online publication date: 2012
  • (2011)Predicting Malignancy from Mammography Findings and Surgical BiopsiesProceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine10.1109/BIBM.2011.71(339-344)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2011
  • (2011)Prediction of Breast Cancer Using Artificial Neural NetworksJournal of Medical Systems10.1007/s10916-011-9768-036:5(2901-2907)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2011

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media