Literature DB >> 25029379

Prostate cancer grading: use of graph cut and spatial arrangement of nuclei.

Kien Nguyen, Anindya Sarkar, Anil K Jain.   

Abstract

Tissue image grading is one of the most important steps in prostate cancer diagnosis, where the pathologist relies on the gland structure to assign a Gleason grade to the tissue image. In this grading scheme, the discrimination between grade 3 and grade 4 is the most difficult, and receives the most attention from researchers. In this study, we propose a novel method (called nuclei-based method) that 1) utilizes graph theory techniques to segment glands and 2) computes a gland-score (based on the spatial arrangement of nuclei) to estimate how similar a segmented region is to a gland. Next, we create a fusion method by combining this nuclei-based method with the lumen-based method presented in our previous work to improve the performance of grade 3 versus grade 4 classification problem (the accuracy is now improved to 87.3% compared to 81.1% of the lumen-based method alone). To segment glands, we build a graph of nuclei and lumina in the image, and use the normalized cut method to partition the graph into different components, each corresponding to a gland. Unlike most state-of-the-art lumen-based gland segmentation method, the nuclei-based method is able to segment glands without lumen or glands with multiple lumina. Moreover, another important contribution in this research is the development of a set of measures to exploit the difference in nuclei spatial arrangement between grade 3 images (where nuclei form closed chain structure on the gland boundary) and grade 4 image (where nuclei distribute more randomly in the gland). These measures are combined to generate a single gland-score value, which estimates how similar a segmented region (which is a set of nuclei and lumina) is to a gland.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25029379     DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2336883

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging        ISSN: 0278-0062            Impact factor:   10.048


  11 in total

1.  Connecting Markov random fields and active contour models: application to gland segmentation and classification.

Authors:  Jun Xu; James P Monaco; Rachel Sparks; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-03-28

2.  Amide proton transfer (APT) magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer: comparison with Gleason scores.

Authors:  Yukihisa Takayama; Akihiro Nishie; Masaaki Sugimoto; Osamu Togao; Yoshiki Asayama; Kousei Ishigami; Yasuhiro Ushijima; Daisuke Okamoto; Nobuhiro Fujita; Akira Yokomizo; Jochen Keupp; Hiroshi Honda
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 2.310

3.  Gland segmentation in prostate histopathological images.

Authors:  Malay Singh; Emarene Mationg Kalaw; Danilo Medina Giron; Kian-Tai Chong; Chew Lim Tan; Hwee Kuan Lee
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-06-21

4.  Multiview boosting digital pathology analysis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jin Tae Kwak; Stephen M Hewitt
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 5.428

5.  Luminal Water Imaging: A New MR Imaging T2 Mapping Technique for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.

Authors:  Shirin Sabouri; Silvia D Chang; Richard Savdie; Jing Zhang; Edward C Jones; S Larry Goldenberg; Peter C Black; Piotr Kozlowski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 6.  Artificial intelligence at the intersection of pathology and radiology in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stephnie A Harmon; Sena Tuncer; Thomas Sanford; Peter L Choyke; Barış Türkbey
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 2.630

7.  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

8.  Feature-driven local cell graph (FLocK): New computational pathology-based descriptors for prognosis of lung cancer and HPV status of oropharyngeal cancers.

Authors:  Cheng Lu; Can Koyuncu; German Corredor; Prateek Prasanna; Patrick Leo; XiangXue Wang; Andrew Janowczyk; Kaustav Bera; James Lewis; Vamsidhar Velcheti; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 8.545

9.  Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Evaluate Performance of a Classifier for Automatic Grading of Prostate Cancer From Digitized Histopathologic Images.

Authors:  Guy Nir; Davood Karimi; S Larry Goldenberg; Ladan Fazli; Brian F Skinnider; Peyman Tavassoli; Dmitry Turbin; Carlos F Villamil; Gang Wang; Darby J S Thompson; Peter C Black; Septimiu E Salcudean
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-03-01

Review 10.  Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer Pathology Image Analysis.

Authors:  Shidan Wang; Donghan M Yang; Ruichen Rong; Xiaowei Zhan; Junya Fujimoto; Hongyu Liu; John Minna; Ignacio Ivan Wistuba; Yang Xie; Guanghua Xiao
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.