Literature DB >> 26158076

Evaluation environment for digital and analog pathology: a platform for validation studies.

Brandon D Gallas1, Marios A Gavrielides1, Catherine M Conway2, Adam Ivansky1, Tyler C Keay1, Wei-Chung Cheng1, Jason Hipp2, Stephen M Hewitt2.   

Abstract

We present a platform for designing and executing studies that compare pathologists interpreting histopathology of whole slide images (WSIs) on a computer display to pathologists interpreting glass slides on an optical microscope. eeDAP is an evaluation environment for digital and analog pathology. The key element in eeDAP is the registration of the WSI to the glass slide. Registration is accomplished through computer control of the microscope stage and a camera mounted on the microscope that acquires real-time images of the microscope field of view (FOV). Registration allows for the evaluation of the same regions of interest (ROIs) in both domains. This can reduce or eliminate disagreements that arise from pathologists interpreting different areas and focuses on the comparison of image quality. We reduced the pathologist interpretation area from an entire glass slide (10 to [Formula: see text]) to small ROIs ([Formula: see text]). We also made possible the evaluation of individual cells. We summarize eeDAP's software and hardware and provide calculations and corresponding images of the microscope FOV and the ROIs extracted from the WSIs. The eeDAP software can be downloaded from the Google code website (project: eeDAP) as a MATLAB source or as a precompiled stand-alone license-free application.

Keywords:  digital pathology; microscopy; reader studies; technology evaluation; validation; whole slide imaging

Year:  2014        PMID: 26158076      PMCID: PMC4478997          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.1.3.037501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)        ISSN: 2329-4302


  15 in total

Review 1.  Digital pathology: exploring its applications in diagnostic surgical pathology practice.

Authors:  Ana Richelia Jara-Lazaro; Thomas Paulraj Thamboo; Ming Teh; Puay Hoon Tan
Journal:  Pathology       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 5.306

2.  Critical comparison of 31 commercially available digital slide systems in pathology.

Authors:  Marcial García Rojo; Gloria Bueno García; Carlos Peces Mateos; Jesús González García; Manuel Carbajo Vicente
Journal:  Int J Surg Pathol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.271

3.  Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future.

Authors:  Ronald S Weinstein; Anna R Graham; Lynne C Richter; Gail P Barker; Elizabeth A Krupinski; Ana Maria Lopez; Kristine A Erps; Achyut K Bhattacharyya; Yukako Yagi; John R Gilbertson
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 4.  Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Shaimaa Al-Janabi; André Huisman; Paul J Van Diest
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 5.087

5.  A scoring system for immunohistochemical staining: consensus report of the task force for basic research of the EORTC-GCCG. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Cooperative Group.

Authors:  P J van Diest; P van Dam; S C Henzen-Logmans; E Berns; M E van der Burg; J Green; I Vergote
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  ACR-AAPM-SIIM technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging.

Authors:  James T Norweck; J Anthony Seibert; Katherine P Andriole; David A Clunie; Bruce H Curran; Michael J Flynn; Elizabeth Krupinski; Ralph P Lieto; Donald J Peck; Tariq A Mian
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; Douglas G Altman; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

8.  Understanding diagnostic variability in breast pathology: lessons learned from an expert consensus review panel.

Authors:  Kimberly H Allison; Lisa M Reisch; Patricia A Carney; Donald L Weaver; Stuart J Schnitt; Frances P O'Malley; Berta M Geller; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 9.  Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy. The STARD initiative.

Authors:  Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.493

10.  Observer performance in the use of digital and optical microscopy for the interpretation of tissue-based biomarkers.

Authors:  Marios A Gavrielides; Catherine Conway; Neil O'Flaherty; Brandon D Gallas; Stephen M Hewitt
Journal:  Anal Cell Pathol (Amst)       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 2.916

View more
  5 in total

1.  Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms.

Authors:  Katherine Elfer; Sarah Dudgeon; Victor Garcia; Kim Blenman; Evangelos Hytopoulos; Si Wen; Xiaoxian Li; Amy Ly; Bruce Werness; Manasi S Sheth; Mohamed Amgad; Rajarsi Gupta; Joel Saltz; Matthew G Hanna; Anna Ehinger; Dieter Peeters; Roberto Salgado; Brandon D Gallas
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2022-07-27

2.  Development of Training Materials for Pathologists to Provide Machine Learning Validation Data of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Victor Garcia; Katherine Elfer; Dieter J E Peeters; Anna Ehinger; Bruce Werness; Amy Ly; Xiaoxian Li; Matthew G Hanna; Kim R M Blenman; Roberto Salgado; Brandon D Gallas
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 3.  Axon and Myelin Morphology in Animal and Human Spinal Cord.

Authors:  Ariane Saliani; Blanche Perraud; Tanguy Duval; Nikola Stikov; Serge Rossignol; Julien Cohen-Adad
Journal:  Front Neuroanat       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 3.856

4.  Influence of study design on digital pathology image quality evaluation: the need to define a clinical task.

Authors:  Ljiljana Platiša; Leen Van Brantegem; Asli Kumcu; Richard Ducatelle; Wilfried Philips
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-06-21

5.  A Pathologist-Annotated Dataset for Validating Artificial Intelligence: A Project Description and Pilot Study.

Authors:  Sarah N Dudgeon; Si Wen; Matthew G Hanna; Rajarsi Gupta; Mohamed Amgad; Manasi Sheth; Hetal Marble; Richard Huang; Markus D Herrmann; Clifford H Szu; Darick Tong; Bruce Werness; Evan Szu; Denis Larsimont; Anant Madabhushi; Evangelos Hytopoulos; Weijie Chen; Rajendra Singh; Steven N Hart; Ashish Sharma; Joel Saltz; Roberto Salgado; Brandon D Gallas
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2021-11-15
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.