View
309
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
1/13
This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
Download details:
IP Address: 185.22.251.245
This content was downloaded on 09/06/2015 at 09:03
Please note that terms and conditions apply.
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to thejournal homepagefor more
2009 Phys. Med. Biol. 54 3773
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155/54/12/011)
ome Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/iopscience.iop.org/page/termshttp://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155/54/12http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155http://iopscience.iop.org/http://iopscience.iop.org/searchhttp://iopscience.iop.org/collectionshttp://iopscience.iop.org/journalshttp://iopscience.iop.org/page/aboutioppublishinghttp://iopscience.iop.org/contacthttp://iopscience.iop.org/myiopsciencehttp://iopscience.iop.org/myiopsciencehttp://iopscience.iop.org/contacthttp://iopscience.iop.org/page/aboutioppublishinghttp://iopscience.iop.org/journalshttp://iopscience.iop.org/collectionshttp://iopscience.iop.org/searchhttp://iopscience.iop.org/http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155/54/12http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/iopscience.iop.org/page/terms7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
2/13
IOP PUBLISHING PHYSICS INMEDICINE ANDBIOLOGY
Phys. Med. Biol.54(2009) 37733784 doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/12/011
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering forquantitative characterization of breast cancer
Wael M Elshemey and Wafaa B Elsharkawy
Biophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt
E-mail: waelelshemey@yahoo.com
Received 15 February 2009, in final form 7 April 2009
Published 28 May 2009
Online atstacks.iop.org/PMB/54/3773
Abstract
In the last decade there has been growing interest in the possibility of
characterizing breast cancer using differences in the coherent x-ray-scattering
profiles of normal and malignant tissues. To a great extent, characterization has
depended on the differences in the peak positions of both tissues in addition to
the overall profile which exhibits a distinctive sharp adipose peak in the case of
a normal breast. In many excised tissue samples, breast cancer samples may
be mixed with a variable percentage of other tissues which affect the shape
of the x-ray-scattering profile and consequently the ability to characterize the
tissue. Moreover, fibroglandular tissue produces a scattering profile showing
an extent of similarity to breast cancer. The present study introduces a Monte
Carlo simulation code capable of tracing photon transport inside a mixedtwo-component sample. The code is utilized to simulate and best fit x-ray-
scattering profiles of the measured samples. This provides reliable breast
tissue characterization in addition to a quantitative estimate of the percentage
of each component in a given sample. It is expected that the present simulation
would potentially enhance the characterization of breast cancer using the x-
ray-scattering technique.
1. Introduction
Biological samples have distinctive x-ray-scattering profiles with one or more peaks in theforward direction of scattering. These peaks arise from the interference of coherently scattered
photons and are found to hold characteristic features of the investigated samples.
Several authors have presented x-ray-scattering measurements on a variety of important
biological samples such as muscle, liver, fat, blood, bone, brain white and gray matter, breast
tissue, hair, bioequivalent materials, in addition to a number of lyophilized proteins and
biological samples (Kosanetzkyet al1987, Evans et al1991, Royle and Speller1991,1995,
Farquharson and Speller1997, Kidaneet al 1999, Elshemeyet al 2001, 2003, Desoukyet al
0031-9155/09/123773+12$30.00 2009 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine Printed in the UK 3773
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/54/12/011mailto:waelelshemey@yahoo.comhttp://stacks.iop.org/PMB/54/3773http://stacks.iop.org/PMB/54/3773mailto:waelelshemey@yahoo.comhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/54/12/0117/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
3/13
3774 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
2001, Polettiet al2002a, and James2006). Their measurements supported the expectation of
Speller and Horrocks (1991) about the x-ray-scattering technique becoming a new source of
information in medicine and biology.
While most of these measurements were performed using the angle dispersive method of
conventional x-ray diffractometers, some authors used an energy dispersive x-ray-scattering(EDXRS) method employing synchrotron radiation to obtain similar information (Ryan and
Farquharson2004and Castroet al2004).
The dependence of the shape of the x-ray-scattering profile on the interference of
coherently scattered photons directed the efforts of some authors toward obtaining measured
molecular form factors which accounted for molecular interference effects (Tartari et al1997,
2002, Peplow and Verghese 1998 and Poletti et al 2002b). Johns and Wismayer (2004)
reported that a degree of variation existed in the form factor values obtained using different
diffractometers.
Elshemey etal (1999) used a Monte Carlo simulation code employingmeasured molecular
form factors by Peplow and verghese (1998) in order to examine the possibility of tissue
characterization of several biological samples.
A number of significant medical applications of the x-ray-scattering technique have beenpresented by many authors. These applications included the determination of bone mineral
density (Royle and Speller 1991, 1995), the detection of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular
carcinoma (Elshemey et al 2003), the development of new imaging techniques such as
coherent x-ray scatter imaging and diffraction enhanced imaging (Harding and Schreiber
1999, Bohndieket al 2008 and Griffiths et al 2008) and the measurement of x-ray scatter
signatures for normal and neoplastic breast tissue based on the differences in fat content of
breast in both cases. The last application was first introduced by Kidane et al(1999) followed
by valuable contributions by a number of research groups (Ryan and Farquharson2004,2007,
Castroet al2004, Ryanet al2005, Bohndieket al2008and Griffithset al2008).
Theodorakou and Farquharson (2008) reviewed the x-ray techniques used for human
soft tissue analysis. The reviewed techniques included x-ray diffraction, x-ray fluorescence,
Compton scattering, Compton to coherent scattering ratio and attenuation measurements. The
classified soft tissues included brain, breast, colon, fat, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, prostate,skin, thyroid and uterus.
In this work, a Monte Carlo simulation code is modified so that it becomes capable of
simulating x-ray scattering from mixed two-component samples. The code is compared with
the old version (Elshemey et al 1999) for x-ray scattering from single-component samples.
It is also compared with practical measurements for single and mixed biological samples
with predefined components percentages by volume. Mixed biological samples included
fibroglandular, normal and malignant breast tissues. Quantitative estimation of the percentage
of each component in mixed samples is also assessed.
2. Theoretical background
Low-angle scattering of low-energy x-ray photons (e.g., 8.047 keV) is dominated by the elastic
(coherent) scattering process. The energy transferred to the struck electron is small compared
with the binding energy of the electron. The atom is neither ionized nor excited and the recoil
momentum is absorbed by the entire atom. Under these conditions, the wavelength of the
radiation scattered by the bound electrons of an atom is essentially the same as that of the
incident photon. There is a fixed phase relationship among the scattered radiations, which are
thus capable of producing constructive interference. The differential coherent scattering cross
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
4/13
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer 3775
section per atom for unpolarized radiation determines the new direction of the photon after
coherent scattering and can be expressed approximately as
dacoh
d
=
r2o
21 + cos
2 . [F(x,Z)]2 , (1)
whererois the classical electron radius,is the photon scattering angle and
r2o
2
1 + cos2
(2)
is the energy-independent Thomson differential cross section per electron, (deT/d). The
variable F(x, Z)is called the atomic form factor which is the sum of the electronic form factors
and represents the ratio of the amplitude of the coherently scattered radiation by an entire
atom to that by a single free electron. The square of this form factor is the probability that
Zelectrons of the atom take up a recoil momentum, (q), without absorbing any energy. The
form factor depends on the combined variable x= sin( /2)/, whereis the wavelength of
the incident photon.
When considering a molecule, the coherent differential scattering cross section is given
bydmcoh
d=
r 2o
2
1 + cos2
.F2m(x), (3)
whereF2m(x) is the square of molecular form factor.
While coherent scattering is the dominant interaction process at low photon energies,
incoherent scattering still takes place but with lower probability. The differential cross section
of incoherent scattering including electron binding effects can be given as the product of
KleinNishina differential cross section dKN,e/d(for Compton collision between a photon
and a free electron) and the incoherent scattering function of an atom S(x, Z). The latter
represents the probability that an atom will be raised to any excited or ionized state when
a photon imparts a recoil momentum to an atomic electron. The quantityx is the same as
that previously defined for the form factor. The differential cross section of a molecule for
incoherent scattering determines the new direction of photon after incoherent scattering andcan be written as
dincoh,m
d=
dKN,e
dSm(x) =
r 2o
2
E/
E
2 E/
E+
E
E/+ cos2 1
Sm(x), (4)
whereSm(x) is the incoherent scattering function of a molecule, considering that atomic cross
sections for incoherent scattering combine independently. EandE are the energies of incident
and scattered photons, respectively.
At low photon energies, the third possible interaction of an incident photon with a
biological sample is photoelectric absorption, where an incident photon is totally absorbed at
the interaction site. The attenuation of an x-ray beam in the diagnostic energy range is due to
all three interaction processes.
For a biological sample of known composition, its mass attenuation coefficient / can
be approximately evaluated from the tabulated coefficientsi/ifor the constituent elements
according to the weighted average wi of each element, where
=
i
wi i
ior = .
i
wi i
i(5)
iand iare, respectively, the attenuation coefficient and density of element i, while and
are, respectively, the linear attenuation coefficient and density of the biological sample
(Hubbell1969).
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
5/13
3776 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
3. Monte Carlo simulation
The present Monte Carlo simulation is a modification of the Monte Carlo simulation by
Elshemey et al (1999). The latter is a step-by-step tracing of the simulation algorithm and
sampling procedures described in detail by Chan and Doi (1983) which was capable ofsimulating the photon transport in a single sample at a time.
For each photon incident on the sample, the first step is to calculate its free path t in
order to predict the first interaction site. This is carried out by sampling from the exponential
probability density function:p(t)= et, suchthatt=1/( ln r), where ris a randomnumber
uniformly distributed in the interval [0, 1] and is the total linear attenuation coefficient of
the scattering medium at the energy of the incident photon (Chan and Doi 1983).
In this work, in order to simulate the photon transport in a two-component mixture, first
the percentage by volume of each component in the mixture is identified. The first photon
free path length is then calculated as the sum of two displacements. The first displacement is
given byd1 = t1v1wheret1is the simulated free path length of photon in the first component
given by t1 = 1/(1 ln r1) and v1 is the percentage by volume of the first component in the
mixture. Similarly, the second displacement is equal to the simulated free path length of the
photon in the second component multiplied by its percentage by volume in the mixture, d2 =
t2v2. In this way, the effective free path length, d, is determined based on the relative volume
of each component in the mixture where, d= d1+ d2.
If the free path length of the photon falls within the sample dimension, the component
with which the photon will interact is selected by generating a uniform random number (from
0 up to 1). If this random number is less than or equal to the percentage by volume of the
first component in the mixture (note that, for example, 20% is equal to 0.2), then the photon
will interact with the first component, otherwise, the photon will interact with the second
component.
The type of interaction mechanism of the photon in the selected component is determined
by the relative probability of interaction at the given photon energy. A random number is
drawn, and according to its value an interaction mechanism is selected (Chan and Doi1983).
The photon is either absorbed (photoelectric effect) and consequently the program willgenerate a new photon, or it will be coherently scattered thus the program will continue tracing
the photon by calculating the new photon coordinates, new free path length and interaction
site taking into consideration the photon scattering angle () and simulated azimuthal angle
(). If the photon is incoherently scattered, the program will follow the same steps as coherent
scattering except that it will take into consideration the change in scattered photon energy.
If the free path length of photon at any step falls outside the sample all photon information
including energy and scattering angle will be saved in a file for the development of the x-ray
photon-scattering profile. At this end, the program will generate another photon up to a pre-
defined maximum number of photons. In the present simulation, 9 106 photons are generated
in each run of the program. The values of the incoherent scattering function are obtained from
Hubbellet al(1975) and the values of measured coherent scattering form factors accounting
for molecular interference effects are obtained from Peplow and Verghese(1998), whereas the
values of photon attenuation coefficients are obtained from Hubbell(1977). These tabulations
were previously proven to be reliable and used by many authors. The block diagram in
figure1summarizes the main simulation steps of the present Monte Carlo code.
4. Materials and methods
Fresh beef muscle and adipose tissues are purchased from a local market, and are mixed at
different percentages by volume using a mixer until acceptable homogeneity is reached. The
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
6/13
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer 3777
Programinputs
Energy
1st sample
percentageSample
dimension
Number ofphotons
2nd samplepercentage
Uploading files containing data for incoherent, coherent,& photoelectric cross-sections for selected samples
Calculate free path length of photon in mixed sampleaccording to percentage of each sample in the mixture
Free path length >sample dimension
Transmitted
photon
Select the sample
with which photonwill interact
according to itspercentage (relativeprobability) in the
mixture
Determine interaction type according to relative interactionprobabilities for selected sample at present photon energy
New photoncoordinates
Coherent Incoherent Photoelectric
Generate New , ,keep E unchanged Generate new, and E Absorbed photon
Energy < threshold Generate newphoton
No
No
Yes
Yes
Figure 1. A block diagram of the Monte Carlo codes main simulation steps.
samples are then measured using a Philips (X-Pert) x-ray diffractometer operating at 40 kV
and 10 mA producing collimated monoenergetic Cu Kx-rays of 8.047 keV. Measurements
are done in the step mode at a step equal to 0.25. The water sample is measured using
the same diffractometer. Breast samples are obtained from women undergoing mastectomyand are preserved in formalin until measured (Peplow and Verghese 1998). The samples
are characterized by a histopathologist for being normal or malignant. Normal breast tissue
samples are usually obtained from the safety margin of a tumor. Breast samples are measured
using a Shimadzu x-ray diffractometer working at 40 kV and 30 mA. The device employs a Cu
target to produce a monoenergetic, 8.047 keV highly collimated x-ray beam. Measurements
are done in step mode at a step equal to 0.5. Diffraction data are collected using a scintillation
detector employing a sodium iodide crystal and a graphite monochromator. Measured and
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
7/13
3778 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated (new) simulated (old)
Water
(b)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated (new) simulated (old)
Beef muscle
(a)
Figure 2. Simulation of x-ray scattering from (a) beef muscle and (b) water using the present codeand the code used by Elshemey et al(1999).
simulated data are subject to three-point smoothing. In the present simulation, pork muscle
is used to simulate breast cancer (Peplow and Verghese 1998and Griffiths et al 2007) while
fibroglandular tissue is simulated as a mixture of adipose tissue and stroma (Kidane et al
1999). Water is used to simulate stroma.
5. Results and discussion
The current simulation is made to pass over several steps of validation. First, the new
simulation (current version) is compared with the old simulation (Elshemey et al 1999) for
x-ray scattering from samples composed of a single component. In order to simulate scattering
from a single component in the modified version, the percentage of the second component is
set to zero. Figures2(a) and (b) present simulated x-ray-scattering profiles from beef muscle
and water, respectively, using the old and new simulation codes. The good agreement between
the old and new simulated x-ray-scattering profiles for both samples indicates that the new
version is still capable of producing scattering profiles similar to that produced by the validated
old program.
The current simulation is further validated by comparing x-ray-scattering profiles from
samples composed of a single component using the present code with measured profiles of
water, beef muscle and beef adipose (figures3(a), (b) and (c), respectively). The results show
that simulated data fit well with the measured samples.
The ability of the present code to simulate x-ray scattering from mixed two-component
samples is examined by comparison with measured profiles of samples mixed at well-definedpercentages by volume. For such purpose, three mixtures having different percentages
(27:73%, 53:47% and 77:23%) of beef adipose and muscle respectively are measured and
compared to simulated profiles at the same percentages (figures3(d), (e) and (f), respectively).
An apparent agreement can be seen between simulated and measured samples. Measuring the
correlation coefficient between simulated and measured data further reinforces this agreement.
The correlation coefficient values for simulated and measured data sets in figure 3 are as
follows: water (0.9793), beef muscle (0.9757), beef adipose (0.9095) and for the three mixtures
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
8/13
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer 3779
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(b)
Muscle
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(c)
Adipose tissue
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(d)
77% adipose
+ 23% muscle
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer(nm-1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(e)
53% adipose
+ 47% muscle
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(f)
27% adipose
+ 73% muscle
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
(a)
Water
Figure 3. Simulated and measured x-ray-scattering profiles of (a) water, (b) beef muscle, (c) beefadipose and (d)(f) mixtures of beef adipose and muscle.
of beef adipose and muscle (27:73%, 53:47% and 77:23%), the values are 0.9308, 0.9631 and
0.9587, respectively.
In this work, the correlation coefficient is measured starting at a momentum transfer value
of 0.9 nm1 (equivalent to a scattering angle of 16 for 8.047 incident x-ray photons) in order
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
9/13
3780 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
measured (breast cancer)
measured (normal breast)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated(breast cancer)
simulated (normal breast)
(b)(a)
Figure 4. Measured (a) and simulated (b) x-ray-scattering profiles of normal breast and breast
cancer samples.
to avoid the disagreement between measured and simulated data at low momentum transfer
values. This disagreement arises mainly from excess measured primary x-rays reaching the
detector at low momentum transfers. For this reason, Peplow and Verghese (1998) used
extrapolated molecular form factor values in their tabulations at low momentum transfers.
Recent work on the characterization of normal and malignant breast tissues using coherent
x-ray scattering has potentially depended on the differences in the percentage of fat and muscle
in normal and malignant breast tissues. Normal breast tissue has higher fat content compared
to malignant tissue. Thus, the scattering profile of normal breast shows a sharp adipose
peak at 1.1 nm1 and a much shorter shoulder at 1.6 nm1. On the other hand, malignant
breast tissue is characterized by reduced intensity at 1.1 nm1 and increased intensity at
1.6 nm1 (kidaneet al1999, Ryan and Farquharson2004, Castroet al2004and Theodorakou
and Farquharson2008). Figure4(a) shows the measured x-ray-scattering profiles of normal
and malignant breast tissues. The difference in the peak position in both cases is obvious.
Figure4(b) illustrates these differences using the present Monte Carlo simulation.
Figure5presents simulated and measured x-ray-scattering profiles of (a) breast adipose,
(b) normal breast, (c)(e) three breast cancer samples and (f) mixed sample. A remarkable
agreement is shown between simulated and measured profiles with a correlation coefficient of
about 0.9955 for all samples except the mixed sample (figure5(f)), which shows a correlation
coefficient of 0.9807. The differences in the scattering profiles at momentum transfer values
less than 0.9 nm1 are discussed earlier in this section.
It has been possible using the current simulation to predict a quantitative estimate of
the composition of the mixed breast tissue sample presented in figure5(f). Despite beingcharacterized as a breast cancer by the histopathologist, the x-ray-scattering profile of this
sample looked remarkably different from the profiles of other breast cancer samples, except
that it still retains the same peak position. The comparison of such sample with simulated x-ray
scattering from breast cancer also yielded low correlation. This suggested the presence of a
component other than breast cancer tissue that has contributed to the x-ray-scattering profile in
figure5(f). After performing a number of iterative simulations and measuring the correlation
coefficient in each step, simulated and measured data yielded best correlation (0.9807) at
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
10/13
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer 3781
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcount
s
simulated measured
Breast adipose
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
Normal breast
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
Breast cancer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
Breast cancer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
Breast cancer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
simulated measured
Mixed sample
(b)
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
(a)
Figure 5.Simulatedand measured x-ray-scattering profiles of (a) breast adipose, (b) normal breast,(c)(e) three breast cancer samples and (f) mixed sample.
80% breast cancer and 20% normal tissue. The selection of breast tissue components to fit a
measured profile is not random and depends on the available knowledge of the characteristics
of x-ray-scattering profiles of different breast tissue compositions. This knowledge makes the
fitting process faster, knowing that a single simulation takes less than a minute. The ability
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
11/13
3782 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Counts
100%a 75%a : 25%c50%a : 50%c 25%a : 75%c100%c
0
400
800
1200
1600
2000
2400
2800
3200
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Counts
100%n 75%n : 25%c50%n :50%c 25%n : 75%c100%c
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
25%a:75%s normal breastbreast cancer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer(nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
Kidane et al 1999 23%a : 77%s
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
Momentum transfer (nm -1)
Normalizedcounts
30%a : 70%s 25%a : 75%s20%a : 80%s 15%a : 85%s
(b)
(c) (d)
(e)
(a)
Figure 6. Simulated x-ray-scattering profiles of (a) mixtures of adipose and breast cancer, (b)mixtures of normal breast and breast cancer, (c) different compositions of fibroglandular tissue, (d)fibroglandular, normal breast and breast cancer and (e) fitting of fibroglandular tissue from Kidaneet al(1999) using present simulation (23% adipose:77% stroma).
of the present code to fit mixed samples having well-predefined percentages with remarkable
success (figures3(d), (e) and (f)) would probably add confidence to the predicted component
types and percentages.
7/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
12/13
Monte Carlo simulation of x-ray scattering for quantitative characterization of breast cancer 3783
Figure 6 presents simulated x-ray-scattering profiles of mixtures that are possibly
encountered when investigating an excised breast tissue sample. Figure 6(a) shows
mixed samples of different percentages of breast adipose and breast cancer revealing some
characteristic features differentiating each sample composition. As the percentage of breast
cancer increases, the intensity of the adipose peak at 1.1 nm1 decreases while the intensityat 1.6 nm1 increases. Similar behavior is seen in figure6(b) for different percentages of
normal and cancerous breast tissue. Figure6(c) presents possible x-ray-scattering profiles
of fibroglandular tissue composed of different percentages of breast adipose and stroma.
The characteristic profile exhibited by each composition shows how much a Monte Carlo
simulation would be useful in characterizing and predicting the compositions of such tissues.
This remark also applies to the tissue compositions presented in figures 6(a) and (b).
Figure6(d) shows how fibroglandular tissue (25% adipose and 75% stroma), normal breast
and breast cancer can easily be distinguished from their x-ray-scattering profiles. The present
simulation has also been used to fit the fibroglandular x-ray-scattering profile presented by
Kidaneet al1999(figure6(e)). The program estimates that the fitted fibroglandular tissue is
composed of 23% breast adipose and 77% stroma based on a correlation coefficient of 0.9649
between measured and simulated data.
6. Conclusion
It has been possible to construct and validate a Monte Carlo simulation capable of simulating
x-ray scattering from breast tissue samples. The code has shown remarkable reliability in
simulating the measured x-ray-scattering profiles of single and mixed breast tissue samples
with a high degree of correlation between simulated and measured sets of data. The
program has been able to efficiently simulate x-ray scattering from two-component mixtures
of known percentages by volume and producing quantitative estimates of the percentage of
each component in measured breast tissue samples. It is expected that the present simulation
would be very supportive in providing a quantitative approach for the characterization of breast
tissues. A fully automated version of the program using Computer Aided Diagnosis would
make it possible to provide an on-spot quantitative characterization of breast tissue.
References
Bohndiek S E, Cook E J, Arvanitis C D, Olivo A, Royle G J, Clark A T, Prydderch M L, Turchetta R and
Speller R D 2008 A CMOSactive pixel sensor system for laboratory-based x-raydiffraction studies of biological
tissue Phys. Med. Biol.5365572
Castro C R F, Barroso R C, Anjos M J, Lopes R T and Braz D 2004 Coherent scattering characteristics of normal and
pathological breast human tissuesRadiat. Phys. Chem.7164951
Chan H P and Doi K 1983 The validity of Monte Carlo simulation in studies of scattered radiation in diagnostic
radiologyPhys. Med. Biol.2810929
Desouky O S, Elshemey W M, Selim N S and Ashour A H 2001 Analysis of low-angle x-ray scattering peaks from
lyophilized biological samplesPhys. Med. Biol.462099106
Elshemey W M, Desouky O S and Ashour A H 2001 Low-angle x-ray scattering from lyophilized blood constituents
Phys. Med. Biol.465319
Elshemey W M, Desouky O S, Mohammed M S, Elsayed A A and El-houseini M E 2003 Characterization of cirrhosis
and hepatocellular carcinoma using low-angle x-ray scattering signatures of serum Phys. Med. Biol.48N18
Elshemey W M, Elsayed A A and El-Lakkani Ali 1999 Characteristics of low-angle x-ray scattering from some
biological samplesPhys. Med. Biol.44290715
Evans S H, Bradley D A, Dance D R, Bateman J E and Jones C H 1991 Measurement of small-angle photon scattering
for some breast tissues and tissue substitute materials Phys. Med. Biol.36718
FarquharsonM J andSpeller R D 1997Measuring bone mineral density in archaeologicalbone using energy dispersive
low angle x-ray scattering techniquesJ. Archaeol. Sci.2476572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/3/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/3/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/3/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.04.039http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.04.039http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.04.039http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/28/2/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/28/2/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/28/2/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/8/305http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/8/305http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/8/305http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/2/318http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/2/318http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/2/318http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/48/17/401http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/48/17/401http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/48/17/401http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/304http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/304http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/304http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/002http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/002http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/002http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996.0158http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996.0158http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996.0158http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996.0158http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/002http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/304http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/48/17/401http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/2/318http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/46/8/305http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/28/2/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.04.039http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/3/0107/23/2019 Monte Carlo Simulation of X-ray Scattering for Quantitative Characterization of Breast Cancer
13/13
3784 W M Elshemey and W B Elsharkawy
Griffiths J A, Royle G J, Hanby A M, Horrocks J A, Bohndiek S E and Speller R D 2007 Correlation of energy
dispersive diffraction signatures and microCT of small breast tissue samples with pathological analysis Phys.
Med. Biol.52615164
Griffiths J A, Royle G J, Horrocks J A, Hanby A M, Pani S and Speller R D 2008 Angular dispersive diffraction
microCT of small breast tissue samplesRadiat. Phys. Chem.7737380
Harding G and Schreiber B 1999 Coherent x-ray scatter imaging and its applications in biomedical science and
industry Radiat. Phys. Chem.5622945
Hubbell J H 1969 Photon cross sections, attenuation coefficients, and energy absorption coefficients from 10 keV to
100 GeVNSRDS-NBS 29(Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards)
Hubbell J H 1977 Photon mass attenuation and mass energy-absorption coefficients for H, C, N, O, Ar and seven
mixtures from 0.1 keV to 20 MeVRadiat. Res.705881
Hubbell J H, Veigele Wm J, Briggs E A, Brown R T, Cromer D T and Howerton R J 1975 Atomic form factors,
incoherent scattering functions and photon scattering cross-sectionsJ. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data4471538
James V J 2006 A place for fiber diffraction in the detection of breast cancer Cancer Detect. Prev.302338
Johns P C and Wismayer M P 2004 Measurement of coherent x-ray scatter form factors for amorphous materials
using diffractometersPhys. Med. Biol.49523350
Kidane G, Speller R D, Royle G J and Hanby A M 1999 X-ray scatter signatures for normal and neoplastic breast
tissuesPhys. Med. Biol.441791802
Kosanetzky J, Knoerr B, Harding G and Neitzel U 1987 X-ray diffraction measurement of some plastic materials and
body tissuesMed. Phys.1452632
Peplow D E and Verghese K 1998 Measured molecular coherent scattering form factors of animal tissues, plastics
and human breast tissuePhys. Med. Biol.43243152
Poletti M E, Goncalves O D and Mazzaro I 2002a Coherent and incoherent scattering of 17.44 and 6.93 kev
x-ray photons scattered from biological and biological-equivalent samples: characterization of tissuesX-Ray
Spectrom.315761
Poletti M E, Goncalves O D, SchechterH andMazzaroI 2002b Precise evaluationof elastic differentialscattering cross-
sections and theiruncertaintiesin x-rayscattering experimentsNucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B18743746
Royle G J, Farquharson M, Speller R and Kidane G 1999 Applications of x-ray diffraction analysis in crystalline and
amorphous body tissuesRadiat. Phys. Chem.5624758
Royle G J and Speller R D 1991 Low angle x-ray scattering for bone analysisPhys. Med. Biol.363839
Royle G J and Speller R D 1995 Quantitative x-ray diffraction analysis of bone and marrow volumes in excised
femoral head samplesPhys. Med. Biol.40148798
Ryan E and Farquharson M J 2004 Angular dispersive x-ray scattering from breast tissue using synchrotron radiation
Radiat. Phys. Chem.719712
RyanE A and Farquharson M J 2007Breast tissue classification using x-rayscattering measurements and multivariatedata analysisPhys. Med. Biol.52667996
Ryan E A, Farquharson M J and Flinton D M 2005 The use of Compton scattering to differentiate between
classifications of normal and diseased breast tissuePhys. Med. Biol.50333748
Speller R D and Horrocks J A 1991 Photon scatteringa new source of information in medicine and biologyPhys.
Med. Biol.3616
Tartari A, Casnati E, BonifazziC and Baraldi C 1997 Molecular differential cross sections for x-raycoherentscattering
in fat and polymethyl methacrylatePhys. Med. Biol.42255160
Tartari A, Taibi A, Bonifazzi C and Baraldi C 2002 Updating of form factor tabulations for coherent scattering of
photons in tissuesPhys. Med. Biol.4716375
Theodorakou C and Farquharson M J 2008 Human soft tissue analysis using x-ray or gamma-ray techniques Phys.
Med. Biol.53R11149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/005http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/005http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2007.12.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2007.12.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2007.12.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00283-2http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00283-2http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00283-2http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3574732http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3574732http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3574732http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdp.2006.04.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdp.2006.04.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdp.2006.04.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/49/23/003http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/49/23/003http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/49/23/003http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/7/316http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/7/316http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/7/316http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.596143http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.596143http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.596143http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/43/9/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/43/9/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/xrs.538http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/xrs.538http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/xrs.538http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(01)01149-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(01)01149-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00284-4http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00284-4http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00284-4http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/3/006http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/3/006http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/3/006http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/40/9/008http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/40/9/008http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/40/9/008http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/22/009http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/22/009http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/22/009http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/50/14/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/50/14/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/50/14/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/42/12/018http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/42/12/018http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/42/12/018http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/1/312http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/1/312http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/1/312http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/11/R01http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/11/R01http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/11/R01http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/11/R01http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/1/312http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/42/12/018http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/1/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/50/14/010http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/22/009http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/40/9/008http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/3/006http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00284-4http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(01)01149-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/xrs.538http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/43/9/001http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.596143http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/7/316http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/49/23/003http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdp.2006.04.001http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3574732http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(99)00283-2http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2007.12.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/005Recommended