Method of characterizing tissue of a patient

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10231696
  • Patent Number
    10,231,696
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, October 12, 2017
    7 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 19, 2019
    5 years ago
Abstract
A method for characterizing tissue of a patient, including receiving acoustic data derived from the interaction between the tissue and the acoustic waves irradiating the tissue; generating a morphology rendering of the tissue from the acoustic data, in which the rendering represents at least one biomechanical property of the tissue; determining a prognostic parameter for a region of interest in the rendering, in which the prognostic parameter incorporates the biomechanical property; and analyzing the prognostic parameter to characterize the region of interest. In some embodiment, the method further includes introducing a contrast agent into the tissue; generating a set of enhanced morphology renderings of the tissue after introducing the contrast agent; determining an enhanced prognostic parameter from the enhanced morphology renderings; and analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates generally to the medical imaging field, and more specifically to an improved method of characterizing tissue of a patient in the ultrasound imaging field.


BACKGROUND

Early detection of breast cancer and other types of cancer is typically an important factor to successfully treat cancer. However, there are several reasons that, for some cancer patients, the disease is not detected early. One reason is limitations in the performance of screening. For example, women with dense breast tissue have a very high relative risk for developing breast cancer, but mammography (the current standard tool for breast screening) has low sensitivity for detection of cancer in patients with dense breast tissue, which leads to a relatively high false negative rate. In other words, the performance of mammography is typically worse for this high-risk group of women with dense breast tissue. Another reason contributing to later detection of breast cancer is limited participation in breast tissue screening. Lower participation rates in annual mammograms are partly due to limited access to the screening tool (mammograms require specialized medical centers and highly trained staff), fear of radiation, and discomfort. Furthermore, due to the ionizing nature of mammography, the use of mammography is limited in younger women, who would otherwise be at risk of excessive radiation over their lifetime.


Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves on some of the limitations of mammography by providing relatively comfortable, radiation-free imaging capability, MRI is prohibitively expensive for routine use and also has limited accessibility. Improved detection of cancer would decrease the percentage of breast cancer incidence at later stages. Thus, there is a need in the medical imaging field to create an improved method of characterizing tissue in a patient. This invention provides such an improved method.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES


FIG. 1 is a schematic of the method of a first preferred embodiment;



FIGS. 2A and 2B are schematics of an ultrasound scanner used in the method of a preferred embodiment;



FIGS. 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, and 5C are schematics of variations of the step of generating a morphology rendering in the method of a preferred embodiment;



FIG. 6 is a table summarizing the step of determining a prognostic parameter in the method of a preferred embodiment;



FIGS. 7A and 7B are schematic of a decision tree variation and a predictive model variation, respectively of the step of analyzing the prognostic parameter in the method of a preferred embodiment;



FIGS. 8A and 8B are variations of the method of a second preferred embodiment; and



FIG. 9 is a table summarizing the step of determining an enhanced prognostic parameter in the method of a second preferred embodiment.





DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The following description of preferred embodiments of the invention is not intended to limit the invention to these preferred embodiments, but rather to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use this invention.


As shown in FIG. 1, the method 100 of characterizing tissue of a patient of a preferred embodiment includes the steps of: receiving acoustic data S110 derived from the interaction between the tissue and the acoustic waves irradiating the tissue; generating a morphology rendering from the acoustic data S120, wherein the rendering represents at least one biomechanical property of the tissue; determining a prognostic parameter for a region of interest in the rendering S160, wherein the prognostic parameter incorporates the biomechanical property; and analyzing the prognostic parameter to characterize the region of interest S180. In a second preferred embodiment, the method further includes the steps of introducing a contrast agent S190. The method enables accurate, inexpensive, comfortable and accessible assessment of a volume of tissue within a patient. The method preferably incorporates ultrasound radiation to obtain acoustic data providing measurements of biomechanical properties of the tissue, such as acoustic reflectivity (based on the reflection of acoustic waves from the tissue), acoustic attenuation (based on amplitude changes of acoustic waves in the tissue), and acoustic speed (based on departure and arrival times of acoustic signals between emitters and receives). In one preferred embodiment, the method is used to detect breast cancer in a human or other animal, but may alternatively be used to detect any suitable kind of cancer. The method may also be used to characterize the tissue to diagnose presence of cancer, assess its type and determine its extent (e.g., to determine whether a malignant mass in the tissue is surgically removable), or to assess risk of cancer development (e.g., measuring breast tissue density). The method may be repeated in different examinations of the patient, such as to allow repeated assessments and tissue characterization of the tissue. For example, repeating the method at various times may facilitate the identification and/or monitoring of a growing lesion (e.g., cancer or fibroadenoma) marked by differences in characterization of the tissue between examinations. The method may, however, be used in any suitable application involving characterization of tissue.


The step of receiving acoustic data S110 functions to irradiate or insonify the tissue in order to obtain acoustic measurement of the tissue. The step of receiving acoustic data S110 preferably includes scanning the tissue S112 with a plurality of transmitters that emit acoustic waves towards the tissue and detecting acoustic waves S114 with a plurality of receivers that detect acoustic waves after the acoustic waves interact with the tissue. The detected acoustic waves preferably include acoustic waves scattered by the tissue, where the scattered acoustic waves includes a mix of reflected and acoustic waves. The steps of scanning the tissue S112 and detecting acoustic waves S114 are preferably performed with an ultrasound tomographic scanner and methods similar to those described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,385,474 and 6,728,567, and U.S. Patent Publication Number 2008/0275344, which are incorporated in their entirety by this reference. However, any suitable scanner may be used. As shown in FIG. 2A, the steps of scanning the tissue S112 and detecting acoustic waves S114 are preferably performed during a scan of a patient who lies prone on their stomach on a scanner table having a hole. The table, which may be made of a durable, flexible material such as sailcloth, preferably contours to the patient's body, thereby increasing scanning access to the axilla regions of the breast and increasing patient comfort. The hole in the table allows the breast to protrude through the table and be submerged in an imaging tank filled with water or another suitable fluid to propagate acoustic waves. As shown in FIG. 2B, a ring-shaped transducer is located within the imaging tank and encircles or otherwise surrounds the breast. Multiple emitters that direct safe, non-ionizing ultrasound pulses toward the tissue, and multiple detectors that receive and record data scattering from the tissue, are distributed around the ring transducer. During the scanning step S112, the ring transducer passes along the tissue, such as in an anterior-posterior direction between the chest wall and the nipple region of the breast to acquire an acoustic data set including measurements of acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and acoustic speed, preferably at discrete scanning steps, or coronal “slices”. The acoustic data for each “slice” cross-section of the tissue preferably includes an acoustic reflection data set, an acoustic attenuation data set, and an acoustic speed data set. However, the ring transducer may additionally and/or alternatively include any suitable biomechanical property of the tissue during the scanning step. The scanning and detecting steps are preferably quick, such as with a data acquisition time of less than approximately 1 second per “slice”, which helps to avoid motion artifacts in the subsequent morphology renderings and enables the use of contrast agents. The step of receiving acoustic data S110 may additionally and/or alternatively include retrieving acoustic data from a storage device such as a hard drive or an online server.


The step of generating a morphology rendering of the tissue from the acoustic data S120 functions to translate the acoustic data into a medium useful for analysis. As shown in FIGS. 3A and 3B, generating a morphology rendering S120 preferably includes generating a plurality of renderings. Each rendering preferably represents a respective biomechanical property of the tissue. As shown in FIG. 1, in a preferred embodiment, generating a plurality of renderings S120 includes generating an acoustic reflection rendering S124 that represents acoustic reflection from the tissue, generating an acoustic attenuation rendering S132 that represents acoustic attenuation within the tissue, and generating an acoustic speed rendering S136 that represents acoustic speed within the tissue. However, generating a plurality of renderings may additionally and/or alternatively include generating any rendering that represents any measurable biomechanical property of the tissue.


As shown in FIG. 3A, generating an acoustic reflection rendering S124 includes generating a set of two-dimensional (2D) images representing acoustic reflection S125, where each image represents acoustic reflection of the tissue at a particular cross-section of the tissue taken during a particular discrete scanning step. In other words, the set of 2D acoustic reflection images forms a stack of 2D renderings that collectively represents acoustic reflection from the entire (or partial) volume of scanned tissue. The set of 2D acoustic reflection images (Ir) is derived from changes in acoustic impedance of the tissue and provides echo-texture data and anatomical detail for the tissue. Generating an acoustic reflection rendering S124 may additionally and/or alternatively include generating a three-dimensional (3D) acoustic reflection rendering S126 that is a volumetric representation of the acoustic reflectivity of the volume of tissue. In a first variation, as shown in FIG. 3A, generating a 3D acoustic reflection rendering S126 includes combining the set of 2D acoustic reflection images into a three-dimensional (3D) acoustic reflection rendering. In a second variation, as shown in FIG. 3B, generating a 3D acoustic reflection rendering S126′ includes converting 3D volumetric acoustic data, obtained by scanning the tissue in a 3D manner, directly into a 3D acoustic reflection rendering.


Similar to step S124, generating an acoustic attenuation rendering S132 includes generating a set of 2D images representing acoustic attenuation S133, where each image represents acoustic attenuation within the tissue at a particular cross-section of the tissue taken during a particular discrete scanning step, to form a stack of 2D renderings for acoustic attenuation within the tissue. Generating an acoustic attenuation rendering S132 may additionally and/or alternatively include generating a 3D acoustic attenuation rendering S134 that is a volumetric representation of the acoustic attenuation within the volume of scanned tissue, where variations S134 and S134′ may be similar to either variation of analogous steps S126 and S126′ for acoustic reflection.


Similar to steps S124 and S132, generating an acoustic speed rendering S136 includes generating a set of 2D images representing acoustic speed S137, where each image represents acoustic speed within the tissue, to form a stack of 2D renderings for acoustic speed within the tissue. Generating an acoustic speed rendering S136 may additionally and/or alternatively include generating a 3D acoustic speed rendering S138 that is a volumetric representation of the acoustic speed within the volume of scanned tissue, where variation S138 and S138′ h may be similar to either variation of analogous steps S126 and S126′ for acoustic reflection.


In some embodiments, generating a morphology rendering S120 may further includes combining at least one acoustic reflection rendering, at least one acoustic attenuation rendering, and/or at least one acoustic speed rendering into a set of merged 2D or 3D renderings. In one variation, as shown in FIG. 4, generating a morphology rendering S120 includes generating a set of merged 2D renderings S142 by combining at least a portion of the set of the 2D acoustic reflection renderings, at least a portion of the 2D acoustic attenuation renderings, and/or at least a portion of the 2D acoustic speed renderings. In another variation, generating a morphology rendering S120 includes generating a merged 3D rendering S144. Generating a merged 3D rendering S144 may include combining separate 3D biomechanical property renderings S145 (e.g., combining the 3D acoustic reflection rendering, the 3D acoustic attenuation rendering, and/or the 3D acoustic speed rendering), as shown in FIG. 5A. Generating a merged 3D rendering S144 may alternatively include combining the set of merged 2D renderings into a 3D volumetric rendering S146, as shown in FIG. 5B.


The combined, or merged, renderings are overlaid on one another to allow visualization of multiple biomechanical properties to be viewed simultaneously and facilitate a more comprehensive evaluation of features of the tissue. As shown in FIG. 5C, combining the 2D or 3D renderings into a merged 2D or 3D rendering preferably includes combining the acoustic reflection renderings, a thresholded version of the acoustic attenuation renderings, and a thresholded version of the acoustic speed renderings S148. Variations of the combining step S148 may include combining thresholded (with any suitable threshold values) or non-thresholded versions of any of the renderings. In one embodiment, the renderings are merged by adding: (1) the reflection rendering, (2) a first thresholded version of the acoustic speed rendering (including measurements of the acoustic speed rendering falling between a first speed threshold “a” and a second speed threshold “b”) and (3) the combination of a second thresholded version of the acoustic speed rendering (including measurements of the acoustic speed rendering falling above a third speed threshold “c”) and a thresholded acoustic attenuation image (including measurements of the acoustic attenuation image above an attenuation threshold). In one embodiment, the thresholds “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d” are set by determining which threshold values yield mass margins (such as the outlines of legions or tissue structures) most similar to those seen in MRI or other relevant imaging modalities. This merging may be expressed according to the formula below, where the bracketed mathematical operation denotes the logical “AND” operation:

If=Ir+Is=as=b+[Is>c·Ia>d]

However, any suitable formula or algorithm may be used to merge or fuse the various renderings into a single rendering.


The method may further include iterating at least one of the biomechanical property renderings based on the other biomechanical property renderings. For example, altering a threshold used to highlight a region of interest in the acoustic attenuation and/or acoustic speed renderings may change the acoustic attenuation and/or acoustic speed renderings enough to provide additional insight about the nature of the tissue, to iteratively improve the acoustic reflection rendering. However, the iteration may involve revising any of acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and acoustic speed renderings based on any other of the renderings. Furthermore, the method may include iteratively revising thresholds used when merging renderings (e.g., thresholds “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d”).


The method may further include the step of identifying a region of interest in the tissue from the morphology rendering S150, which functions to establish a portion of the tissue that requires further attention, such as for diagnosis and/or monitoring purposes. The region of interest, such as a lesion, is preferably identified and/or marked by outlining a mass as it appears on a 3D acoustic reflection rendering. For instance, a threshold of margin sharpness of a suspected mass on the reflection rendering, or another suitable threshold, may be used to identify the boundary of the region of interest in the tissue. The outline of the identified region of interest is preferably replicated on the 3D acoustic attenuation and/or acoustic speed renderings. The region of interest may alternatively be identified as a 2D lesion or mass among the 2D acoustic reflection image renderings and may be replicated on the 2D acoustic attenuation and/or acoustic speed renderings. However, the region of interest may alternatively be identified on the acoustic attenuation and/or acoustic speed renderings, or other biomechanical property rendering. The boundary of the region of interest may be iteratively identified, such as by progressively refining the boundary among the various biomechanical property renderings.


The step of determining a prognostic parameter S160 for a region of interest in the rendering functions to quantify the biomechanical characteristics of the region of interest in the tissue to provide a measure with which to characterize (e.g., to predict, monitor, or otherwise describe) the region of interest. Determining a prognostic parameter may include determining one or more quantitative prognostic parameters S162 and/or one or more qualitative prognostic parameter S172. The quantitative prognostic parameters may involve a reflection index corresponding to the acoustic reflectivity, absolute or relative volume average values of attenuation, and/or absolute or relative volume average values of sound speed of the region of interest. The qualitative prognostic parameters may involve the shape or other characteristics of the acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and acoustic speed of the region of interest in the merged and/or unmerged morphology renderings. Although preferably all of these quantitative and qualitative prognostic parameters are determined, only a portion of these parameters may be determined. In this manner, the prognostic parameters extend beyond the existing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System BIRADS criteria that are commonly used for 2D ultrasound applications in characterizing tissue masses, by incorporating quantitative measurements of sound speed, attenuation, and/or other biomechanical properties and/or qualitative morphological characteristics of the tissue and/or lesion. These extended prognostic parameters can further extend beyond the current BIRADS criteria into the realm of 3-D characterization by using lesion characterization derived from all three spatial dimensions. Furthermore, additional prognostic information can be gained by characterizing the time dependence of these parameters as derived from multiple patient exams performed at different intervals of time.


As shown in FIG. 6, determining one or more quantitative prognostic parameters S162 may include calculating a volume average value S166 of a biomechanical property of the region of interest from one or more of the renderings. In one variation, calculating a volume average value S166 includes calculating an absolute average (e.g., mean) value of the biomechanical property S167, averaged over the volume of the region of interest. For example, the absolute values of average acoustic attenuation and acoustic speed measurements are preferably calculated from the 3D acoustic attenuation rendering and the 3D acoustic speed rendering, respectively, although they may alternatively be calculated from the 2D acoustic attenuation and acoustic speed renderings, respectively. The absolute values of these averages are preferably determined by statistical analysis of the pixels within the region of interest on the 3D or 2D renderings, and volume-averaged across the mass of the region of interest. However, the volume average may be a representative value of the biomechanical property of the region of interest calculated in any suitable manner. For example, the average value of acoustic speed may be calculated as described in U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0275344. As another example, the volume average may additionally and/or alternatively include other aspects, such as being weighted by a spatial distribution of the values of the biomechanical property throughout the region of interest.


In another variation, calculating a volume average value S166 includes calculating a relative value of the biomechanical property S168 that takes into account the difference between the absolute value of the biomechanical property in the region of interest and the value of the biomechanical property in background tissue surrounding the region of interest. Accounting for this difference exploits the measured differences in the biomechanical properties of the region of interest compared to the rest of the scanned tissue. In this variation, calculating a volume average value S166 further includes calculating a background value of the biomechanical property in the tissue outside of the region of interest. In one example, calculating a relative value of the biomechanical property S168 includes subtracting the background value of the biomechanical property from the absolute value of the biomechanical property in the region of interest. Alternatively, calculating a relative value S168 may include dividing the absolute value of the biomechanical property in the region of the interest by the background value of the biomechanical property. However, calculating a relative value of the biomechanical property D168 may include any mathematical operation or other comparison that relates the biomechanical property or properties of the region of interest to that of background tissue. Since any systematic errors from the scan are present in both the background measurements and absolute values of the biomechanical properties, calculating a relative value of the biomechanical property of the region of interest cancels out the systematic errors, and the resulting relative values for the region of interest are thereby normalized. The background value of the biomechanical property is a measurement of the biomechanical property in the background tissue surrounding the region of interest. For example, the background measurement may be the average value of the biomechanical property (e.g., acoustic attenuation or acoustic speed) in a volume of the tissue surrounding the region of interest between the boundary of the region of interest and a surrounding tissue boundary. The surrounding tissue boundary may be defined by extending the boundary of the region of interest by a particular margin, such as 2 centimeters, or any suitable distance. However, the surrounding tissue boundary may be defined in any suitable manner, and the background measurement may be a measurement of the biomechanical property in any suitable portion of the tissue besides the region of interest. In particular, the prognostic parameter may include a relative volume average value of acoustic attenuation for the region of interest, and/or a relative volume average value of acoustic speed for the region of interest.


As shown in FIG. 6, determining one or more qualitative prognostic parameters S172 may include characterizing aspects of the acoustic reflection rendering, the acoustic attenuation rendering and/or the acoustic speed rendering. For the acoustic reflection rendering, determining one or more qualitative prognostic parameters S174 includes characterizing the margin sharpness (e.g., sharp or indistinct), the shape (e.g., oval or not oval), or the architecture (e.g., presence or absence of altered anatomy in surrounding tissue) of the region of interest S174. For the acoustic attenuation rendering, determining one of more qualitative prognostic parameters S172 includes characterizing the 2D or 3D shape (e.g., smooth or irregular) of the region of interest S176 in the acoustic attenuation rendering. For the acoustic speed renderings, determining one of more qualitative prognostic parameters S172 includes characterizing the 2D or 3D shape (e.g., smooth or irregular) of the region of interest S178 in the acoustic speed rendering. However, the qualitative prognostic parameters may characterize any suitable aspect of the biomechanical property renderings. Furthermore, the qualitative prognostic parameters may be converted into a quantitative measure, such as “1” for an indistinct margin and “2” for a sharp margin of the region of interest in the acoustic reflection rendering. As another example, a qualitative prognostic parameter may be converted to a quantitative measure such as a value on a scale (e.g., 1 to 5) that classifies the degree to which the qualitative aspect is expressed. For instance, margin sharpness of the region of interest in the acoustic reflection rendering could be classified with a reflection index as “1” if it very sharp, “3” if it is moderately indistinct, or “5” if it is very indistinct.


The step of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 functions to utilize the prognostic parameter to predict or otherwise characterize the region of interest. The analysis preferably predicts whether the region of interest is a cancerous mass, a benign fibroadenoma, a cyst, another benign finding, an unidentifiable mass (for example, there is no finding), or any suitable characterization or classification. However, the analysis may additionally and/or alternatively monitor trends of one or more prognostic parameters over time, or for any suitable application. The step of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 preferably involves the analysis of multiple prognostic parameters, which may be quantitative or qualitative. For example, as shown in FIG. 6, the analysis may evaluate prognostic parameters that may individually suggest the presence of cancer. For parameters regarding acoustic reflection, the signature of a cancerous mass is typically marked in the acoustic reflection image by having an indistinct and/or ill-defined spiculated or microlobulated margin, a non-oval shape, and architectural distortion including altered anatomy in surrounding tissue due to mass effect and/or retraction. In contrast, a benign mass is typically marked in the acoustic reflection image by having a sharp margin, an oval shape, and little to no architectural distortion. For parameters regarding acoustic attenuation, the signature of a cancerous mass is typically marked by having relatively high absolute and relative volume averaged values of acoustic attenuation, since acoustic waves typically have higher attenuation within a cancerous mass than within surrounding fatty tissue such as breast tissue. In contrast, a benign mass is typically marked by having relatively low absolute and relative volume averaged values of attenuation. For example, acoustic waves transmitted through a tumor at a frequency of 2 MHz typically experience an attenuation of approximately 0.25 to 0.5 dB/cm relative to fat. For parameters regarding acoustic speed, the signature of a cancerous mass is marked by having relatively high acoustic speed, since acoustic waves typically travel at faster speeds within a cancerous mass than within surrounding fatty tissue such as breast tissue. For example, acoustic waves travel approximately 50-150 meters/second faster in a cancerous mass than in fatty tissue. In contrast, a benign mass is typically marked by having relatively low absolute and relative volume averaged values of acoustic speed.


In a first variation, the step of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 includes navigating a decision tree S182 that compares the prognostic parameters to various thresholds in a branched manner that arrives at a final characterization of the region of interest based on the comparisons between the prognostic parameters to the thresholds. The decision tree preferably incorporates prognostic parameters for acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and/or acoustic speed, but may additionally and/or alternatively incorporate parameters for any suitable biomechanical properties (such as quantitative classifications of qualitative prognostic parameters). In one specific embodiment, a comparison at the “top” of the decision tree branches into a first branch if the absolute or relative volume average acoustic attenuation value is less than or equal to a first threshold, and into a second branch if the absolute or relative volume average attenuation is greater than the threshold. Each of these first and second branches are further divided into different paths based on how the absolute or relative volume averages for reflection index, acoustic attenuation, and acoustic speed compare to other thresholds. By following the decision tree, the prognostic parameters lead to the determination or prediction that the region of interest is, for example, cancerous or not cancerous. The particular thresholds may be determined empirically, such as by comparing the diagnostic results of a set of thresholds to the diagnostic results of other methods such as MRI and/or incorporating data and ultrasound tomography from known cancer patients. Furthermore, the importance of each prognostic parameter is preferably evaluated using attribute selection algorithms such as chi-square method, gain ratio, and information gain, which are strategies known to one ordinarily skilled in the art.


In a second variation, as shown in FIG. 7B, the step of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 includes inputting the prognostic parameter into a predictive model S184. The input may include prognostic parameters for acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and/or acoustic speed, but may additionally and/or alternatively incorporate parameters for any suitable biomechanical properties (such as quantitative classifications of qualitative prognostic parameters). The prediction model may be externally validated by using data from known cancer patients or other patients with known types of lesions. However, the prediction model may be validated by any suitable process. Furthermore, in creation of the prediction model, the prediction model is preferably evaluated to identify covariate patterns that may be disproportionately influential or systematically associated with misclassification. The evaluation preferably incorporates a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve as a tool to select one or more possibly optimal predictive models. The ROC curve is preferably constructed using model estimates to determine the weighted combination of acoustic reflectivity, acoustic attenuation, and acoustic speed that predicts cancer with the lowest false positive rate while maintaining sensitivity of at least 90%. The area under the ROC curve represents the overall accuracy of the mode, summarizing: (1) sensitivity, or the proportion of patients in the data set with cancer who are determined by the scanner as having cancer, (2) specificity, the proportion of patients in the data set without cancer who are determined by the scanner as not having cancer, (3) the false positive rate, or the proportion of patients in the data set without cancer who are incorrectly determined by the scanner as having cancer, and (4) the false negative rate, or the proportion of patients in the data set with cancer who are incorrectly determined by the scanner as not having cancer. The sensitivity and specific are preferably conditional estimates that are conditional on the finding of a suspicious region of interest among the empirical data set. However, other aspects of the ROC curve, and/or other methods, may further be used to develop and evaluate the predictive mode.


In a third variation, the step of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 includes evaluating qualitative prognostic parameters that individually suggest the presence of cancer. For parameters regarding acoustic reflection, the signature of cancerous tissue is typically marked in the acoustic reflection image by having (1) an indistinct and/or ill-defined speculated or microlobulated margin, (2) a non-oval shape, and (3) architectural distortion including altered anatomy in surrounding tissue due to mass effect and/or retraction. In contrast, a benign mass is typically marked in the acoustic reflection image by having (1) a sharp margin, (2) an oval shape, and (3) little to no architectural distortion.


Other variations of analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 may include various suitable combinations of the first, second, and third variations. For instance, two or all three of the variations may be performed, and the outcome of the analysis may be the characterization that the majority of the variations produce.


In a second preferred embodiment, as shown in FIG. 8A, the method 200 further includes introducing a contrast agent to the tissue S190, which functions to increase the number of available prognostic parameters and potentially increase accuracy of characterization. In this embodiment, the method preferably further includes: receiving time-dependent sets of enhanced acoustic data S210 after introducing the contrast agent into the tissue; generating a set of enhanced morphology renderings S220 from the time-dependent sets of enhanced acoustic data; determining an enhanced prognostic parameter S260 based on the set of enhanced renderings; and analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter S280. These steps and the steps of the first preferred embodiment of the method may be performed in any suitable order. For instance, as shown in FIG. 8B, gathering unenhanced and enhanced acoustic data and generating unenhanced and enhanced renderings may be performed before determining and analyzing prognostic parameters and enhanced prognostic parameters.


Introducing a contrast agent the tissue S190 may include introducing into the tissue Definity, Optison, and/or any contrast agent suitable for medical diagnostics. The contrast agent is preferably introduced after a first acoustic data set (without the contrast agent) is obtained, such that the first acoustic data set forms a baseline from which a baseline morphology rendering may be generated. In other words, some or all of the steps of the method of the first preferred embodiment may be initially performed before introducing the contrast agent. Alternatively, in the second embodiment of the method, the step of receiving an acoustic data set prior to introducing the contrast agent may be omitted, such that no baseline rendering without the effects of the contrast agent is formed. The contrast agent may be introduced intravenously (or in any suitable manner) at the beginning of scanning, as known by one skilled in the art, to allow circulation throughout the volume of tissue. The introduction of a contrast agent preferably further enhances the biomechanical differences between a region of interest and its surrounding tissue as they appear in the renderings based on the enhanced acoustic data. In particular, the contrast agent may be used to increase relative acoustic reflectivity and acoustic attenuation, and decreases relative acoustic speed within a region of interest.


Receiving time-dependent sets of enhanced acoustic data S210 functions to obtain data that provides a “snapshot” at various times during the interaction of acoustic waves and the tissue with the contrast agent. Generating an enhanced morphology rendering S220 from the enhanced acoustic data functions to provide one or more chronological renderings that represent time-dependent biomechanical properties. Obtaining time-dependent sets of enhanced acoustic data S210 and generating an enhanced morphology rendering S220 are preferably similar to obtaining acoustic data S110 and generating a morphology rendering S120 of the first preferred embodiment. The ring transducer, or any other suitable transducer, may make repeated passes along the tissue to obtain data at specified time intervals, allowing the generation of a morphology rendering corresponding to various times after the introduction of the contrast agent. For instance, the series of enhanced renderings may include renderings of one or more biomechanical properties corresponding to t=0 seconds (when the contrast agent is introduced), and approximately every 30 seconds up to, for example, 420 seconds. However, the renderings may correspond any suitable intervals of time and length of time after introduction of the contrast agent, including only one point in time after introduction of the contrast agent (renderings corresponding to a singular scan, rather than repeated scans over intervals of time).


Determining an enhanced prognostic parameter S260 based on the set of enhanced renderings functions to establish a measure of the changes of biomechanical properties as a result of the introduction of a contrast agent. One or more enhanced prognostic parameters, similar to the prognostic parameters of the method of the first embodiment (or prior to introduction of the contrast agent) may include: an acoustic reflection parameter representing the acoustic reflectivity, an acoustic attenuation parameter representing the acoustic attenuation, and/or an acoustic speed parameter representing the acoustic speed in the region of interest after the contrast agent is introduced into the tissue. As shown in FIG. 9, determining one or more enhanced prognostic parameters may additionally and/or alternatively include: determining the kinetics of flow of the contrast agent S262 across the time-dependent set of enhanced renderings (“wash-in, wash-out” flow as visualized, for example, in the acoustic reflection, acoustic attenuation, and/or acoustic speed renderings), determining the maximum change in value of a biomechanical property S264 in the region of interest (e.g., volume averaged values of acoustic attenuation or acoustic speed) between the baseline rendering and among the set of enhanced renderings, and/or determining the maximum value of a biomechanical property in the region of interest S266 (e.g., volume averaged value of acoustic attenuation or acoustic speed) in the set of enhanced renderings. However, the enhanced prognostic parameter may be any of the quantitative or qualitative prognostic parameters as described in the method of the first embodiment, or any suitable enhanced prognostic parameter.


Analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter S280 functions to evaluate the one or more enhanced prognostic parameters to further characterize the region of interest, such as for distinguishing malignant tissue from benign tissue or other characterizations. Analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter S280 is preferably similar to analyzing the prognostic parameter S180 as in the method of the first preferred embodiment. For example, analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter S280 may include navigating a decision tree with enhanced prognostic parameters, and/or inputting the enhanced prognostic parameter into a predictive model. The decision tree and predictive model using the enhanced prognostic parameters may have thresholds and specific algorithms different from or similar to that of the first embodiment with non-enhanced prognostic parameters. However, analyzing the enhanced prognostic parameter S280 may include any suitable analysis.


As a person skilled in the art will recognize from the previous detailed description and from the figures and claims, modifications and changes can be made to the preferred embodiments of the invention without departing from the scope of this invention defined in the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A system for characterizing a tissue volume of a patient, comprising: a processor configured with instructions to: receive an acoustic dataset derived from acoustic waves detected by a transducer;generate a set of renderings of the tissue volume from the acoustic data set, wherein the set of renderings includes a first rendering representing a distribution of acoustic speed, a second rendering representing a distribution of acoustic attenuation, and a third rendering representing a distribution of acoustic reflection within the tissue volume;generate a merged rendering of the tissue volume from the first rendering, the second rendering, and the third rendering;identify a region of interest from the merged rendering;determine a set of prognostic parameters for the region of interest identified from the merged rendering, wherein the set of prognostic parameters includes an attenuation value, a speed value, and a reflection index characterizing margin sharpness for the region of interest and derived from changes in acoustic impedance within the region of interest; andoutput an analysis of the region of interest derived from the set of prognostic parameters, the analysis indicative of presence of cancer within the tissue volume.
  • 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to identify an outline of the region of interest from the merged rendering.
  • 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to identify an outline of the region of interest in at least one of the first rendering, the second rendering, and the third rendering, and replicate the outline of the region of interest in the merged rendering to identify the outline of the region of interest from the merged rendering.
  • 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to characterize the region of interest as at least one of: a cancerous tumor, a fibroadenoma, a cyst, a nonspecific benign mass, and an unidentifiable mass.
  • 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine a volume average value of attenuation and a volume average value of speed.
  • 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the first rendering, the second rendering, and the third rendering comprise two-dimensional images.
  • 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the first rendering, the second rendering, and the third rendering comprise three-dimensional images.
  • 8. The system of claim 1, wherein the merged rendering is a two-dimensional rendering.
  • 9. The system of claim 1, wherein the merged rendering is a three-dimensional rendering.
  • 10. The system of claim 1, further comprising the transducer, wherein the transducer comprises a receiver configured to detect the acoustic waves from the tissue volume.
  • 11. The system of claim 10, wherein the transducer comprises a plurality of receivers configured to detect the acoustic waves from the tissue volume.
  • 12. The system of claim 1, further comprising the transducer, wherein the transducer comprises a transmitter configured to emit acoustic waves towards the tissue volume.
  • 13. The system of claim 12, wherein the transducer comprises a plurality of transmitters configured to emit the acoustic waves towards the tissue volume.
  • 14. The system of claim 1, further comprising the transducer, wherein the transducer comprises a ring-shaped transducer configured to surround the tissue volume.
  • 15. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to navigate a decision tree that compares at least one of the reflection index, the attenuation value, and the speed value of the region of interest to a threshold.
  • 16. The system of claim 1, further comprising a display in communication with the processor, wherein the display is configured to display rendered information derived from the analysis.
  • 17. The system of claim 1, further comprising an imaging tank configured to receive the tissue volume.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 14/755,618, filed 30 Jun. 2015, now issued as U.S. Pat No. 9,814,441, which is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 13/711,377, filed 11 Dec. 2012, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,101,290, which is a divisional of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 13/027,070, filed on 14 Feb. 2011, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,876,716, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/304,360, filed 12 Feb. 2010, all of which are incorporated in their entirety by this reference.

US Referenced Citations (192)
Number Name Date Kind
3154067 Stenstrom et al. Oct 1964 A
3771355 Sachs Nov 1973 A
3881466 Wilcox May 1975 A
3886489 Jones May 1975 A
4028934 Sollish Jun 1977 A
4059010 Sachs Nov 1977 A
4075883 Glover Feb 1978 A
4105018 Greenleaf et al. Aug 1978 A
4222274 Johnson Sep 1980 A
4317369 Johnson Mar 1982 A
4328707 Clement et al. May 1982 A
4431008 Wanner et al. Feb 1984 A
4433690 Green et al. Feb 1984 A
4509368 Whiting et al. Apr 1985 A
4515165 Carroll May 1985 A
4541436 Hassler et al. Sep 1985 A
4542744 Barnes et al. Sep 1985 A
4562540 Devaney Dec 1985 A
4564019 Miwa Jan 1986 A
4646756 Watmough et al. Mar 1987 A
4662222 Johnson May 1987 A
4671256 Lemelson Jun 1987 A
4733562 Saugeon Mar 1988 A
4855911 Lele et al. Aug 1989 A
4858124 Lizzi et al. Aug 1989 A
4917096 Englehart et al. Apr 1990 A
4941474 Pratt, Jr. Jul 1990 A
5003979 Merickel et al. Apr 1991 A
5029476 Metala et al. Jul 1991 A
RE33672 Hirohide Aug 1991 E
5095909 Nakayama et al. Mar 1992 A
5103129 Slayton et al. Apr 1992 A
5143069 Kwon et al. Sep 1992 A
5158071 Umemura et al. Oct 1992 A
5178147 Ophir et al. Jan 1993 A
5179455 Garlick Jan 1993 A
5212571 Garlick et al. May 1993 A
5255683 Monaghan Oct 1993 A
5260871 Goldberg Nov 1993 A
5268876 Rachlin Dec 1993 A
5269309 Fort et al. Dec 1993 A
5280788 Janes et al. Jan 1994 A
5296910 Cole Mar 1994 A
5297553 Sliwa, Jr. et al. Mar 1994 A
5304173 Kittrell et al. Apr 1994 A
5305752 Spivey et al. Apr 1994 A
5318028 Mitchell et al. Jun 1994 A
5329817 Garlick et al. Jul 1994 A
5339282 Kuhn et al. Aug 1994 A
5349954 Tiemann et al. Sep 1994 A
5413108 Alfano May 1995 A
5415164 Faupel et al. May 1995 A
5433202 Mitchell et al. Jul 1995 A
5463548 Asada et al. Oct 1995 A
5465722 Fort et al. Nov 1995 A
5474072 Shmulewitz Dec 1995 A
5479927 Shmulewitz Jan 1996 A
5485839 Aida et al. Jan 1996 A
5487387 Trahey et al. Jan 1996 A
5513639 Satomi et al. May 1996 A
5546945 Soldner Aug 1996 A
5553618 Suzuki et al. Sep 1996 A
5558092 Unger et al. Sep 1996 A
5573497 Chapelon Nov 1996 A
5582173 Li Dec 1996 A
5588032 Johnson et al. Dec 1996 A
5590653 Aida et al. Jan 1997 A
5596992 Haaland et al. Jan 1997 A
5606971 Sarvazyan Mar 1997 A
5609152 Pellegrino et al. Mar 1997 A
5620479 Diederich Apr 1997 A
5640956 Getzinger et al. Jun 1997 A
5643179 Fujimoto Jul 1997 A
5660185 Shmulewitz et al. Aug 1997 A
5664573 Shmulewitz Sep 1997 A
5673698 Okada et al. Oct 1997 A
5678565 Sarvazyan Oct 1997 A
5722411 Suzuki et al. Mar 1998 A
5743863 Chapelon Apr 1998 A
5749364 Sliwa, Jr. et al. May 1998 A
5759162 Oppelt et al. Jun 1998 A
5762066 Law et al. Jun 1998 A
5766129 Mochizuki Jun 1998 A
5787049 Bates Jul 1998 A
5797849 Vesely et al. Aug 1998 A
5800350 Coppleson et al. Sep 1998 A
5810731 Sarvazyan et al. Sep 1998 A
5817025 Alekseev et al. Oct 1998 A
5833614 Dodd et al. Nov 1998 A
5833627 Shmulewitz et al. Nov 1998 A
5846202 Ramamurthy et al. Dec 1998 A
5855554 Schneider et al. Jan 1999 A
5865167 Godik Feb 1999 A
5865743 Godik Feb 1999 A
5891619 Zakim et al. Apr 1999 A
6002958 Godik Dec 1999 A
6005916 Johnson et al. Dec 1999 A
6014473 Hossack et al. Jan 2000 A
6023632 Wilk Feb 2000 A
6050943 Slayton et al. Apr 2000 A
6056690 Roberts May 2000 A
6083166 Holdaway et al. Jul 2000 A
6102857 Kruger Aug 2000 A
6109270 Mah et al. Aug 2000 A
6117080 Schwartz Sep 2000 A
6135960 Holmberg Oct 2000 A
6149441 Pellegrino et al. Nov 2000 A
6242472 Sekins et al. Jun 2001 B1
6245017 Hashimoto et al. Jun 2001 B1
6256090 Chen et al. Jul 2001 B1
6289235 Webber et al. Sep 2001 B1
6292682 Kruger Sep 2001 B1
6296489 Blass et al. Oct 2001 B1
6317617 Gilhuijs et al. Nov 2001 B1
6351660 Burke et al. Feb 2002 B1
6368275 Sliwa et al. Apr 2002 B1
6385474 Rather et al. May 2002 B1
6413219 Avila et al. Jul 2002 B1
6450960 Rather et al. Sep 2002 B1
6475150 Haddad Nov 2002 B2
6478739 Hong Nov 2002 B1
6490469 Candy Dec 2002 B2
6511427 Sliwa, Jr. et al. Jan 2003 B1
6527759 Tachibana et al. Mar 2003 B1
6540678 Rather et al. Apr 2003 B2
6559178 Zamoyski May 2003 B1
6574499 Dines et al. Jun 2003 B1
6587540 Johnson et al. Jul 2003 B1
6636584 Johnson et al. Oct 2003 B2
6645202 Pless et al. Nov 2003 B1
6672165 Rather et al. Jan 2004 B2
6716412 Unger Apr 2004 B2
6728567 Rather et al. Apr 2004 B2
6776760 Marmarelis Aug 2004 B2
6785570 Nir Aug 2004 B2
6810278 Webber et al. Oct 2004 B2
6837854 Moore et al. Jan 2005 B2
6883194 Corbeil et al. Apr 2005 B2
6926672 Moore et al. Aug 2005 B2
6939301 Abdelhak Sep 2005 B2
6984210 Chambers et al. Jan 2006 B2
7025725 Dione et al. Apr 2006 B2
7179449 Lanza et al. Feb 2007 B2
7285092 Duric et al. Oct 2007 B2
7346203 Turek et al. Mar 2008 B2
7497830 Li Mar 2009 B2
7530951 Fehre et al. May 2009 B2
7556602 Wang et al. Jul 2009 B2
7570742 Johnson et al. Aug 2009 B2
8876716 Duric et al. Nov 2014 B2
9101290 Duric et al. Aug 2015 B2
9814441 Duric et al. Nov 2017 B2
20010029334 Graumann et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010037075 Candy Nov 2001 A1
20020065466 Rather et al. May 2002 A1
20020099290 Haddad Jul 2002 A1
20020131551 Johnson et al. Sep 2002 A1
20030138053 Candy et al. Jul 2003 A1
20040030227 Littrup et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040059265 Candy et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040152986 Fidel et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040167396 Chambers et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040181154 Peterson et al. Sep 2004 A1
20050165309 Varghese et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050196025 Schofield Sep 2005 A1
20050260745 Domansky et al. Nov 2005 A1
20060009693 Hanover et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020205 Kamiyama Jan 2006 A1
20060064014 Falco et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060084859 Johnson et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060085049 Cory et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060287596 Johnson et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060293597 Johnson et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070015949 Kaiser Jan 2007 A1
20070167823 Lee et al. Jul 2007 A1
20080045864 Candy et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080218743 Stetten et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080229832 Huang et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080269812 Gerber et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080275344 Glide-Hurst et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080281205 Naghavi et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080294027 Frinking et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080294043 Johnson et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080319318 Johnson et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090035218 Ross et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090076379 Hamill et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090129556 Ahn et al. May 2009 A1
20090143674 Nields et al. Jun 2009 A1
20100331699 Yu et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110152685 Misono Jun 2011 A1
20130267850 Berman Oct 2013 A1
20140316269 Zhang et al. Oct 2014 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (18)
Number Date Country
2324602 Sep 1999 CA
0284055 Sep 1988 EP
0351610 Jan 1990 EP
0538241 Apr 1993 EP
0609922 Aug 1994 EP
0661029 Jul 1995 EP
0774276 May 1997 EP
1063920 Jan 2001 EP
2005253827 Sep 2005 JP
2007181679 Jul 2007 JP
2009034521 Feb 2009 JP
WO-9947046 Sep 1999 WO
WO-0228350 Apr 2002 WO
WO-0230288 Apr 2002 WO
WO-2004061743 Jul 2004 WO
WO-2005057467 Jun 2005 WO
WO-2007023408 Mar 2007 WO
WO-2011100697 Aug 2011 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (77)
Entry
Azhari et al., “Volumetric Imaging with Ultrasonic Spiral CT,” Radiol 212 (1999) 270-275.
Banihashemi, B. et al., “Ultrasound Imaging of Apoptosis in Tumor Response: Novel Preclinical Monitoring of Photodynamic Therapy Effects.” Cancer Research, vol. 68, No. 20, Oct. 15, 2008, pp. 8590-8596.
Barlow, et al., “Prospective Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model for Women Undergoing Screening Mammogrpahy,” J. Nat'l Cancer Institute 98(17): 1204-1214 (2006).
Boone et al. “Dedicated Breast CT: Radiation Dose and Image Quality Evaluation,” Med Phys 221(3): 657-667 (2001).
Boston, et al., “Estimation of the Content of Fat and Parenchyma in Breast Tissue Using MRI T1 Histograms and Phantoms,” MRI 23: 591-599 (2005).
Boyd, “Quantitative Classification of Mammographic Densities and Breast Cancer Risk: Results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study,” J Nat'l Cancer Institute 87(9): 670-675 (1995).
Byng et al., 37 The Quantitative Analysis of Mammographic Densities,: Phys Med Biol 39 (1994) 1629-1638.
“Centerline, PortalVision section, Summer 2002 edition, published by Varian Medical Systems”.
Chan, et al., An Agglomeration Multigrid Method for Unstructured Grids, Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 218, 1998.
Chang, et al., Kirchhoff migration of ultrasonic images, Materials evaluation, V59, N3, 413-417, 2001.
Chelfouh et al., “Characterization of Urinary Calculi: in Vitro Study of ‘Twinking Artifact’ revealed by Color-Flow Sonography,” AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 171( 4) (1998) 1055-60.
Chen et al., “Projecting Absolute Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in White Women with a Model that Includes Mammographic Density,” J. Nat'l Cancer Institute 98(17) (2006) 1215-1226.
Diederich et al., “The design of ultrasound applicators for interstitial hyperthermia,” Ultrasonics Symposium, Proc IEEE 1993 Baltimore, MD, USA Oct. 31-Nov. 3, 1993, New York, NY, USA, 1215-1219.
Duric et al. “Computed Ultrasound Risk Evaluation,” Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute. pp. 1-23. 2008.
Duric et al., “Detection of Breast Cancer with Ultrasound Tomography: First Results with the Computed Ultrasound Risk Evaluation (CURE) Prototype,” Med Phys 34(2) (2007).
Dussik, “The Ultrasonic Field as a Medical Tool,” Amer J Phys Med 33(1) (1954) 5-20.
European search report dated Jul. 6, 2017 for EP Application No. 11742970.4.
Fjield et al., “A Parametric Study of the Concentric-Ring Transducer Design for MRI Guided Ultrasound Surgery,” J. Acoust. Soc. America 100 (2) Pt. 1 (1996).
Gervias et al., “Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Experience and Technical Success with Radio-frequency Ablation of 42 Tumors,” Radiology 226 (2003) 417-424.
Glide, “A Novel Approach to Evaluating Breast Density Using Ultrasound Tomography,” Dissertation Graduate School of Wayne State University (2007).
Glide et al., “Novel Approach to Evaluating Breast Density Utilizing Ultrasound Tomography,” Med Phys 34(2) (2007) 744-753.
Glide-Hurst, “A New Method for Quantitative Analysis of Mammographic Density,” Med Phys 34(11) (2007) 4491-4498.
Glide-Hurst et al., “A Novel Ultrasonic Method for Measuring Breast Density and Breast Cancer Risk,” Med Imaging 2008, Proc SPIE vol. 6920, 69200Q.
Glide-Hurst et al., “Volumetric breast density evaluation from ultrasound tomography images”, Medical Physics, vol. 35, 2008, pp. 3988-3997.
Greenleaf, “Computerized Tomography with Ultrasound,” Proc IEEE 71(3) (1983) 330-337.
Greenleaf et al., “Artificial Cavitation Nuclei Significantly Enhance Acoustically Incuded Cell Transfection,” Ultrasound Med & Biol 24 (1998) 587-595.
Hayashi, “A New Method of Measuring in Vivo Sound Speed in the Reflection Mode,” J Clin Ultrasound 16(2) (1988) 87-93.
Jellins et al., “Velocity Compensation in Water-Coupled Breast Echography,” Ultrasonics 11(5) (1973) 223-6.
Kaizer et al., “Ultrasonographically Defined Parenchymal Pattenrs of the Breast: Relationship to Mammographic Patterns and Other Risk Factors for Breast Cancer,” Brit J Radiology 61(722) (1988) 118-24.
Karssemeijer, “Automated Classification of Parenchymal Patterns in Mammograms,” Phys Med Biol 43 (1998) 365-378.
Kerlikowske et al., “Longitudinal Measurement of Clinical Mammographic Breast Density to Improve Estimation of Breast Cancer Risk,” J. Nat'l Cancer Institute 99(5) (2007) 386-395.
Klimes, Grid Travel-time Tracing: Second-order Method for the First Arrivals in Smooth Media, Pageoph, vol. 148, Nos. 3/4,1996.
Kossoff et al., “Average Velocity of Ultrasound in the Human Female Breast,” J Acoust Soc America 53(6) (1973) 1730-6.
Li et al., Breast Imaging Using Transmission Ultrasound: Reconstructing Tissue Parameters of Sound Speed and Attenuation,2008 International Conference on BioMedical Engineering and Informatics, IEEE computer society, 708-712.
Li et al., “Clinical Breast Imaging Using Sound-Speed Reconstructions of Ultrasound Tomography Data,” Med Imaging 2008, Proc SPIE vol. 6920, 6920009.
Li et al., Comparison of ultrasound attenuation tomography methods for breast imaging, Medical Imaging 2008: Ultrasoniclmaging and Signal Processing, Proc. of SPIE vol. 6920, 692015-(1-9), 2008.
Li et al., “In Vivo Breast Sound-Speed Imaging with Ultrasound Tomography”, Ultrasound in Med & Bioi., vol. 35, No. 10, 2009, pp. 1615-1628.
Li et al., Refraction corrected transmission ultrasound computed tomography for application in breast imaging, Med. Phys. 37(5), May 2010, 2233-2246.
Louvar et al., “Correlation of Color Doppler Flow in the Prostate with Tissue Microvascularity,” Cancer 1:83(1) (1998) 135-40.
Marias, “Automatic Labelling and BI-RADS Characterisation of Mammogram Densities,” Proc 2005 IEEE, Sep. 1-4, 2005, pp. 6394-6398.
Mast, “Empirical Relationships Between Acoustic Parameters in Human Soft Tissues,” Acoust Research Letters Online, Nov. 16, 2000, pp. 37-42.
Masugata et al., “Relationship Between Myocardial Tissue Density Measured by Microgravimetry and Sound Speed Measured by Acoustic Microscopy,” Ultrasound in Med & Biol 25(9) (1999) 1459-1463.
McCormick et al., Multigrid solution of a linearized, regularized least-squares problem in electrical impedance tomography, Inverse Problems 9, 1993, 697-713.
Metz, “Basic principles of ROC analysis”; Semin Nucl Med. Oct. 8, 1978 (4):283-98.
Metz, “Receiver Operating Characteristic Analysis: A Tool for the Quantitative Evaluation of Observer Performance and Imaging Systems”; J Am Coli Radiol 2006; 3: 413-422.
Metz, “ROC methodology in radiologic imaging”; Invest Radiol. Sep. 21, 1986 (9):720-33.
Miller et al., “Sonoporation of Cultured Cells in the Rotating Tube Exposure System,” Ultrasound Med & Biol 25 (1999) 143-149.
Noble et al., “Spleen Hemostasis Using High-Intensity Ultrasound: Survival and Healing,” J. Trauma Injury, Infection, and Critical Care 53(6) (2002) 1115-1120.
Oh et al., Multigrid Tomographic Inversion With Variable Resolution Data and Image Spaces, IEEE Transactions on Image Proessing, vol. 15, No. 9, Sep. 2006.
Ophir et al., “Elastography: Ultrasonic Estimation and Imaging of the Elastic Properties of Tissues,” Proc Instn Mech Engrs 213(Part H) (1999) 203-233.
Palomares et al., “Mammographic Density Correlation with Gail Model Breast Cancer Risk Estimates and Component Risk Factors,” Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prey 15(7) (2006) 1324-1330.
Quan et al., Sound-speed tomography using first-arrival transmission ultrasound for a ring array, Medical Imaging 2007: Ultrasonic Imaging and Signal Processing, Proc. of SPIE vol. 6513.
Robinson et al., “Quantitative Sonography,” Ultrasound in Med & Biol 12(7): 555-65 (1986).
Singh, Seema et al. “Color Doppler Ultrasound as an Objective Assessment Tool for Chemotherapeutic Response in Advanced Breast Cancer.” Breast Cancer, 2005, vol. 12, No. 1, 2005, pp. 45-51.
Teubner et al., “Comparative Studies of Various Echomammography,” Ultraschall in Der Medizin 3(3) (1982) 109-18, G. Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart/New York.
Vaezy et al., “Real-Time Visualization of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Treatment Using Ultrasound Imaging,” Ultrasound in Med & Biol 27(1) (2001) 33-42.
Walach et al., Local Tissue Attenuation Images Based on Pulsed-Echo Ultrasound Scans, IEEE Transactions Onbiomedical Engineering, vol. 36. No. 2, Feb. 1989.
Wei et al., “Correlation Between Mammographic Density and Volumetric Fibroglandular Tissue Estimated on Breast MR Images,” Med Phys 31(4) (2004) 933-942.
Weiwad et al., “Direct Measurement of Sound Velocity in Various Specimens of Breast Tissue,” Invest Radio! 35(12) (2000) 721-6.
Wolfe, “Risk for Breast Cancer Development Determined by Mammographic Parenchymal Pattern,” Cancer 37(5) (1976) 2486-2493.
Xu, et al. “A Study of 3-Way Image Fusion for Characterizing Acoustic Properties of Breast Tissue.” Medical Imaging 2008: Ultrasonic Imaging and Signal Processing. Feb. 16, 2008.
Yaffe, “Breast Cancer Risk and Measured Mammographic Density,” Eur J Cancer Prevention 7(1) (1998) S47-55.
Yaman, C. et al., “Three-Dimensional Ultrasound to Assess the Response to Treatment in Gynecological Malignancies.” Gynecologic Oncology, Academic Press, vol. 97, No. 2, May 1, 2005, pp. 665-668.
Yankelevitz et al., “Small Pulmonary Nodules: Volumetrically Determined Growth Rates Based on CT Evaluation,” Radiology 217 (2000) 251-256.
Zhang et al., A comparison of material classification techniques for ultrasound inverse imaging, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111 (1), Pt. 1, Jan. 2002.
Chang et al., “Breast Density Analysis in 3-D Whole Breast Ultrasound Images,” IEEE Proc 28th IEEE EMBS Annual International Conference, (2006), 2795-2798.
International search report and written opinion dated May 20, 2011 for PCT Application No. PCT/US2011/024773.
Notice of allowance dated May 8, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/711,377.
Notice of allowance dated Jul. 12, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/755,618.
Notice of allowance dated Aug. 12, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/027,070.
Office action dated Feb. 8, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/027,070.
Office action dated Aug. 17, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/027,070.
Office action dated Sep. 12, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/711,377.
Office action dated Nov. 21, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/027,070.
Orden, et al. Kinetics of a US Contrast Agent in Benign and Malignant Adnexal Tumors; pub. Radiology 2003; 226:405-410.
Saracco, Ariel. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Breast Tumors; pub Division of Medical Imaging and Technology, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC) Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden 2013.
Sehgal, et al. Delta projection imaging on contrast-enhanced ultrasound to quantify tumor microvasculature and perfusion; pub. Acad Radiol. Jan. 2009; 16(1): 71-78.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20180125447 A1 May 2018 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61304360 Feb 2010 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 13027070 Feb 2011 US
Child 13711377 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 14755618 Jun 2015 US
Child 15731000 US
Parent 13711377 Dec 2012 US
Child 14755618 US