Giaquinto AN, Sung H, Miller KD, Kramer JL, Newman LA, Minihan A, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(6):524–41.

Article  Google Scholar 

Weiss A, Chavez-MacGregor M, Lichtensztajn DY, Yi M, Tadros A, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Validation study of the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition prognostic stage compared with the anatomic stage in breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(2):203–209.

Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun LM, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(3):227–36.

Article  Google Scholar 

O’Flynn EAM, Fromageau J, Ledger AE, Messa A, D’Aquino A, Schoemaker MJ, et al. Ultrasound tomography evaluation of breast density: a comparison with noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2017;52(6):343–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Wiskin J, Malik B, Pirshafiey N, Klock J. Limited view reconstructions with transmission ultrasound tomography: clinical implications and quantitative accuracy. In: Medical imaging 2020: ultrasonic imaging and tomography. vol. 11319. Bellingham: SPIE; 2020. p. 167–174.

Andre MP, Barker C, Sekhon N, Wiskin J, Borup DT, Callahan K. Pre-clinical experience with full-wave inverse-scattering for breast imaging. In: Acoustical Imaging. vol. 29. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 73–80.

Ali R, Hsieh S, Dahl J. Open-source gauss-newton-based methods for refraction-corrected ultrasound computed tomography. In: Medical imaging 2019: ultrasonic imaging and tomography. vol. 10955. Bellingham: SPIE; 2019. p. 39–52.

Huthwaite P, Simonetti F. High-resolution imaging without iteration: a fast and robust method for breast ultrasound tomography. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011;130(3):1721–34.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lucka F, Perez-Liva M, Treeby BE, Cox BT. High resolution 3D ultrasonic breast imaging by time-domain full waveform inversion. Inverse Probl. 2022;38(2):025008.

Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Vishnevskiy V, Rau R, Goksel O. Deep variational networks with exponential weighting for learning computed tomography. In: Proceeding of MICCAI. vol. 11769. Cham: Springer; 2019. p. 310–318.

Vishnevskiy V, Sanabria SJ, Goksel O. Image reconstruction via variational network for real-time hand-held sound-speed imaging. In: Proceeding of MLMIR. vol. 11074. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 120–128.

Bernhardt M, Vishnevskiy V, Rau R, Goksel O. Training variational networks with multidomain simulations: speed-of-sound image reconstruction. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2020;67(12):2584–94.

Article  Google Scholar 

Fan Y, Ying L. Solving traveltime tomography with deep learning. Commun Math Stat. 2023;11:3–19.

Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Qu X, Ren C, Yan G, Zheng D, Tang W, Wang S, et al. Deep-learning-based ultrasound sound-speed tomography reconstruction with Tikhonov pseudo-inverse priori. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2022;48(10):2079–94.

Article  Google Scholar 

Fan Y, Wang H, Gemmeke H, Hesser J. MI-Net: a deep network for non-linear ultrasound computed tomography reconstruction. In: Proceeding of IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium. Piscataway: IEEE 2020;1–3.

Fan Y, Wang H, Gemmeke H, Hopp T, Hesser J. DDN: dual domain network architecture for non-linear ultrasound transmission tomography reconstruction. In: Medical imaging 2021: ultrasonic imaging and tomography. vol. 11602. Bellingham: SPIE 2021;40–45.

Zhao W, Wang H, Gemmeke H, van Dongen KWA, Hopp T, Hesser J. Ultrasound transmission tomography image reconstruction with a fully convolutional neural network. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65(23):235021.

Article  Google Scholar 

Fan Y, Wang H, Gemmeke H, Hopp T, Dongen KV, Hesser J. Memory-Efficient Neural Network For Non-Linear Ultrasound Computed Tomography Reconstruction. In: Proceeding of IEEE international symposium on biology image. Piscataway: IEEE 2021;429–432.

Prasad S, Almekkawy M. DeepUCT: Complex cascaded deep learning network for improved ultrasound tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2022;67(6):065008.

Article  Google Scholar 

Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T. U-Net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In: Proceeding of MICCAI. vol. 9351. Cham: Springer 2015; 234–241.

Fan YL, Wang HJ, Gemmeke H, Hopp T, Hesser J. Model-data-driven image reconstruction with neural networks for ultrasound computed tomography breast imaging. Neurocomputing. 2022;467:10–21.

Article  Google Scholar 

Zhu B, Liu JZ, Cauley SF, Rosen BR, Rosen MS. Image reconstruction by domain-transform manifold learning. Nature. 2018;555(7697):487–92.

Article  Google Scholar 

Goodfellow IJ, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M, Xu B, Warde-Farley D, Ozair S, et al. Generative adversarial nets. In: Proceeding of NIPS. vol. 2. New York: Curran Associates 2014;2672–2680.

Arjovsky M, Chintala S, Bottou L. Wasserstein generative adversarial networks. In: Proceeding of ICML. New York: PMLR 2017;214–223.

Gulrajani I, Ahmed F, Arjovsky M, Dumoulin V, Courville A. Improved Training of Wasserstein GANs. In: Proceeding of NIPS. vol. 30. New York: Curran associates 2017;5769–5779.

Isola P, Zhu JY, Zhou TH, Efros AA. Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks. In: Proceeding of CVPR. Piscataway: IEEE 2017;1125–1134.

Mirza M, Osindero S. Conditional generative adversarial nets. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1784.

Simonyan K, Zisserman A. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.1556.

Hinton GE, Salakhutdinov RR. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science. 2006;313(5786):504–7.

Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Hu J, Shen L, Albanie S, Sun G, Wu E. Squeeze-and-excitation networks. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2020;42:2011–23.

Article  Google Scholar 

Roy AG, Navab N, Wachinger C. Recalibrating fully convolutional networks with spatial and channel “squeeze and excitation” blocks. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2019;38:540–9.

Maas AL, Hannun AY, Ng AY. Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic models. In: Proceeding of ICML. vol. 28. New York: PMLR 2013;p. 3.

Kak AC, Slaney M. Principles of computerized tomographic imaging. Philadelphia: SIAM; 2001.

Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

Lou Y, Zhou W, Matthews T, Appleton C, Anastasio M. Generation of anatomically realistic numerical phantoms for photoacoustic and ultrasonic breast imaging. J Biomed Opt. 2017;4:041015.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lou Y. Optical and acoustic breast phantoms. Harvard Dataverse https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NZBJOC.

Mettivier G, Sarno A, Franco Fd, Bliznakova K, Bliznakov Z, Hernandez AM, et al. The Napoli-Varna-Davis project for virtual clinical trials in X-ray breast imaging. In: Proceeding of IEEE nuclear science symposium and medicine image conference. Piscataway: IEEE 2019;1–5.

Sarno A, Mettivier G, di Franco F, Varallo A, Bliznakova K, Hernandez AM, et al. Dataset of patient-derived digital breast phantoms for in silico studies in breast computed tomography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography. Med Phys. 2021;48(5):2682–93.

Article  Google Scholar 

Bliznakova K, Dukov N, Feradov F, Gospodinova G, Bliznakov Z, Russo P, et al. Development of breast lesions models database. Phys Med. 2019;64:293–303.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dukov N, Bliznakova K, Feradov F, Ridlev I, Bosmans H, Mettivier G, et al. Models of breast lesions based on three-dimensional X-ray breast images. Phys Med. 2019;57:80–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

Li C, Duric N, Littrup P, Huang L. In vivo breast sound-speed imaging with ultrasound tomography. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009;35(10):1615–28.

Article  Google Scholar