Literature DB >> 12814236

Multiwavelet grading of pathological images of prostate.

Kourosh Jafari-Khouzani1, Hamid Soltanian-Zadeh.   

Abstract

Histological grading of pathological images is used to determine level of malignancy of cancerous tissues. This is a very important task in prostate cancer prognosis, since it is used for treatment planning. If infection of cancer is not rejected by non-invasive diagnostic techniques like magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography scan, and ultrasound, then biopsy specimens of tissue are tested. For prostate, biopsied tissue is stained by hematoxyline and eosine method and viewed by pathologists under a microscope to determine its histological grade. Human grading is very subjective due to interobserver and intraobserver variations and in some cases difficult and time-consuming. Thus, an automatic and repeatable technique is needed for grading. Gleason grading system is the most common method for histological grading of prostate tissue samples. According to this system, each cancerous specimen is assigned one of five grades. Although some automatic systems have been developed for analysis of pathological images, Gleason grading has not yet been automated; the goal of this research is to automate it. To this end, we calculate energy and entropy features of multiwavelet coefficients of the image. Then, we select most discriminative features by simulated annealing and use a k-nearest neighbor classifier to classify each image to appropriate grade (class). The leaving-one-out technique is used for error rate estimation. We also obtain the results using features extracted by wavelet packets and co-occurrence matrices and compare them with the multiwavelet method. Experimental results show the superiority of the multiwavelet transforms compared with other techniques. For multiwavelets, critically sampled preprocessing outperforms repeated-row preprocessing and has less sensitivity to noise for second level of decomposition. The first level of decomposition is very sensitive to noise and, thus, should not be used for feature extraction. The best multiwavelet method grades prostate pathological images correctly 97% of the time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12814236     DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2003.812194

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  34 in total

1.  An expert support system for breast cancer diagnosis using color wavelet features.

Authors:  S Issac Niwas; P Palanisamy; Rajni Chibbar; W J Zhang
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 2.  Histopathological image analysis: a review.

Authors:  Metin N Gurcan; Laura E Boucheron; Ali Can; Anant Madabhushi; Nasir M Rajpoot; B Yener
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2009-10-30

3.  Automated prostate tissue referencing for cancer detection and diagnosis.

Authors:  Jin Tae Kwak; Stephen M Hewitt; André Alexander Kajdacsy-Balla; Saurabh Sinha; Rohit Bhargava
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  T2-weighted MRI-derived textural features reflect prostate cancer aggressiveness: preliminary results.

Authors:  Gabriel Nketiah; Mattijs Elschot; Eugene Kim; Jose R Teruel; Tom W Scheenen; Tone F Bathen; Kirsten M Selnæs
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Localization of Diagnostically Relevant Regions of Interest in Whole Slide Images: a Comparative Study.

Authors:  Ezgi Mercan; Selim Aksoy; Linda G Shapiro; Donald L Weaver; Tad T Brunyé; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Microscopic medical image classification framework via deep learning and shearlet transform.

Authors:  Hadi Rezaeilouyeh; Ali Mollahosseini; Mohammad H Mahoor
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2016-11-03

7.  Statistical Shape Model for Manifold Regularization: Gleason grading of prostate histology.

Authors:  Rachel Sparks; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Comput Vis Image Underst       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 3.876

8.  Digital pathology image analysis: opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Imaging Med       Date:  2009

9.  Removing batch effects from histopathological images for enhanced cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Sonal Kothari; John H Phan; Todd H Stokes; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Andrew N Young; May D Wang
Journal:  IEEE J Biomed Health Inform       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 5.772

10.  Computer aided analysis of prostate histopathology images Gleason grading especially for Gleason score 7.

Authors:  Jian Ren; Evita T Sadimin; Daihou Wang; Jonathan I Epstein; David J Foran; Xin Qi
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2015
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.