| Literature DB >> 32194821 |
Yifeng Zeng1, Shiqi Xu2, William C Chapman3, Shuying Li1, Zahra Alipour4, Heba Abdelal4, Deyali Chatterjee4, Matthew Mutch3, Quing Zhu1,5.
Abstract
Prior reports have shown optical coherence tomography (OCT) can differentiate normal colonic mucosa from neoplasia, potentially offering an alternative technique to endoscopic biopsy - the current gold-standard colorectal cancer screening and surveillance modality. To help clinical translation limited by processing the large volume of generated data, we designed a deep learning-based pattern recognition (PR) OCT system that automates image processing and provides accurate diagnosis potentially in real-time. Method: OCT is an emerging imaging technique to obtain 3-dimensional (3D) "optical biopsies" of biological samples with high resolution. We designed a convolutional neural network to capture the structure patterns in human colon OCT images. The network is trained and tested using around 26,000 OCT images acquired from 20 tumor areas, 16 benign areas, and 6 other abnormal areas.Entities:
Keywords: colorectal cancer; deep learning; optical biopsy; optical coherence tomography (OCT)
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32194821 PMCID: PMC7052898 DOI: 10.7150/thno.40099
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1PR-OCT imaging procedures. A. Homemade SS-OCT system: FC: fiber coupler, CR: circulator, FPC: fiber polarization controller, CL: collimator, ATT: attenuator, MR: mirror, GV: galvo mirror system, OBJ: objective lens, PD: photodetector, DAQ PC: data acquisition computer; B. An illustration of RetinaNet. The left part is an FPN with a ResNet-18 backbone, and the right part are two sub-networks predicting the classifications and locations.
Figure 2A. A training OCT B-scan image from a normal colon. Both “Teeth” and “Noise” classes are labeled with rectangular boxes shown in different colors; B. A flowchart summarizes the PR-OCT work flow: first, colorectal B-scan images were collected and separated into training and testing sets; second, “Teeth” and “Noise” patterns were labeled on training images and fed into the RetinaNet; finally, the trained model was tested on all testing images and the performance was evaluated.
Lesion characteristics (patients' mean age 69 years old, range: 53-91)
| Pathology reports | Number of imaged areas | Number of OCT images | Average OCT images per area | Median OCT images per area | Average imaged areas per patient | Median imaged areas per patient |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 12550 | 628.4 | 600.0 | 1.1 | 1.0 | |
| 16 | 8038 | 502.4 | 500.0 | 1.2 | 1.0 | |
| 2 | 2500 | 1250.0 | 1250.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| 2 | 1500 | 750.0 | 750.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| 2 | 1500 | 750.0 | 750.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Figure 33D-OCT images of normal and cancerous human colon specimens. A. Normal specimen en face image constructed by axial summation; B. XZ cross-section of normal colon specimen; C. YZ cross-section image; D. Enlarged area of A; E. Representative en face histology; F. Photograph of a normal specimen; G. Cancerous specimen en face image constructed by axial summation; H. XZ cross-section of cancerous colon specimen; I. YZ cross-section image.
Figure 4PR-OCT dentate pattern detection results for: A-B. normal colon images, green boxes are the predicted “Teeth” patterns and the corresponding scores are labelled on the bottom; C. cancer colon images; D. polyp colon images; E. treated complete responder colon images; F. treated non-responder colon images. G. A swarm plot on a box plot of prediction scores for normal, cancer, polyp, treated complete responder (Responder in the figure), and treated non-responder (NonResponder in the figure) colon specimens.
Cohen's d between all scores of five tissue groups
| Normal | Cancer | Polyp | Responder | Non-responder | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.34 | 2.47 | 1.47 | 2.16 | ||
| 0.04 | 3.52 | 0.43 | |||
| 3.62 | 0.44 | ||||
| 2.20 | |||||
Figure 5Plot of the ROC of the binary classification (normal vs. cancer) result. The AUC is labeled under the ROC.