Literature DB >> 31926805

Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study.

Wouter Bulten1, Hans Pinckaers2, Hester van Boven3, Robert Vink4, Thomas de Bel2, Bram van Ginneken5, Jeroen van der Laak2, Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa4, Geert Litjens2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Gleason score is the strongest correlating predictor of recurrence for prostate cancer, but has substantial inter-observer variability, limiting its usefulness for individual patients. Specialised urological pathologists have greater concordance; however, such expertise is not widely available. Prostate cancer diagnostics could thus benefit from robust, reproducible Gleason grading. We aimed to investigate the potential of deep learning to perform automated Gleason grading of prostate biopsies.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, we developed a deep-learning system to grade prostate biopsies following the Gleason grading standard. The system was developed using randomly selected biopsies, sampled by the biopsy Gleason score, from patients at the Radboud University Medical Center (pathology report dated between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2017). A semi-automatic labelling technique was used to circumvent the need for manual annotations by pathologists, using pathologists' reports as the reference standard during training. The system was developed to delineate individual glands, assign Gleason growth patterns, and determine the biopsy-level grade. For validation of the method, a consensus reference standard was set by three expert urological pathologists on an independent test set of 550 biopsies. Of these 550, 100 were used in an observer experiment, in which the system, 13 pathologists, and two pathologists in training were compared with respect to the reference standard. The system was also compared to an external test dataset of 886 cores, which contained 245 cores from a different centre that were independently graded by two pathologists.
FINDINGS: We collected 5759 biopsies from 1243 patients. The developed system achieved a high agreement with the reference standard (quadratic Cohen's kappa 0·918, 95% CI 0·891-0·941) and scored highly at clinical decision thresholds: benign versus malignant (area under the curve 0·990, 95% CI 0·982-0·996), grade group of 2 or more (0·978, 0·966-0·988), and grade group of 3 or more (0·974, 0·962-0·984). In an observer experiment, the deep-learning system scored higher (kappa 0·854) than the panel (median kappa 0·819), outperforming 10 of 15 pathologist observers. On the external test dataset, the system obtained a high agreement with the reference standard set independently by two pathologists (quadratic Cohen's kappa 0·723 and 0·707) and within inter-observer variability (kappa 0·71).
INTERPRETATION: Our automated deep-learning system achieved a performance similar to pathologists for Gleason grading and could potentially contribute to prostate cancer diagnosis. The system could potentially assist pathologists by screening biopsies, providing second opinions on grade group, and presenting quantitative measurements of volume percentages. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 31926805     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30739-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  80 in total

1.  Automated gleason grading on prostate biopsy slides by statistical representations of homology profile.

Authors:  Chaoyang Yan; Kazuaki Nakane; Xiangxue Wang; Yao Fu; Haoda Lu; Xiangshan Fan; Michael D Feldman; Anant Madabhushi; Jun Xu
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 2.  Deep learning in histopathology: the path to the clinic.

Authors:  Jeroen van der Laak; Geert Litjens; Francesco Ciompi
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 3.  Designing deep learning studies in cancer diagnostics.

Authors:  Andreas Kleppe; Ole-Johan Skrede; Sepp De Raedt; Knut Liestøl; David J Kerr; Håvard E Danielsen
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 60.716

4.  Reimagining T Staging Through Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Image Processing Approaches in Digital Pathology.

Authors:  Kaustav Bera; Ian Katz; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2020-11

Review 5.  Artificial intelligence (AI) in urology-Current use and future directions: An iTRUE study.

Authors:  Milap Shah; Nithesh Naik; Bhaskar K Somani; B M Zeeshan Hameed
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2020-05-27

6.  A multi-resolution model for histopathology image classification and localization with multiple instance learning.

Authors:  Jiayun Li; Wenyuan Li; Anthony Sisk; Huihui Ye; W Dean Wallace; William Speier; Corey W Arnold
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.589

7.  Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images.

Authors:  Drew F K Williamson; Tiffany Y Chen; Ming Y Lu; Richard J Chen; Matteo Barbieri; Faisal Mahmood
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 25.671

8.  Combining weakly and strongly supervised learning improves strong supervision in Gleason pattern classification.

Authors:  Sebastian Otálora; Niccolò Marini; Henning Müller; Manfredo Atzori
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  Europe Unites for the Digital Transformation of Pathology: The Role of the New ESDIP.

Authors:  Catarina Eloy; Norman Zerbe; Filippo Fraggetta
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2021-03-12

Review 10.  Epidemiology and genomics of prostate cancer in Asian men.

Authors:  Yao Zhu; Miao Mo; Yu Wei; Junlong Wu; Jian Pan; Stephen J Freedland; Ying Zheng; Dingwei Ye
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 14.432

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.