| Literature DB >> 34110385 |
Daniel Al Mouiee1,2,3, Erik Meijering1,2, Michael Kalloniatis4, Lisa Nivison-Smith4, Richard A Williams5, David A X Nayagam5,6, Thomas C Spencer6,7, Chi D Luu8,9, Ceara McGowan6, Stephanie B Epp6, Mohit N Shivdasani1,6.
Abstract
Purpose: Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are increasingly being used to classify retinal diseases. In this study we investigated the ability of a convolutional neural network (CNN) in categorizing histological images into different classes of retinal degeneration.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34110385 PMCID: PMC8196406 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.10.7.9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol ISSN: 2164-2591 Impact factor: 3.283
Figure 1.An example of an H&E-stained retinal section. The region enclosed by the black dashed boundary represents the pocket in which electrode arrays were implanted in the suprachoroidal space for another study. The flanking regions enclosed by the blue dashed boundaries represent the retinal segments from which the images were sampled.
Figure 2.Examples of each degeneration stage, A) healthy, B) mild damage, C) moderate damage, D)–E) severe damage. The following annotations represent the retinal cellular layers in the segment; GCL: ganglion cell layer, INL: inner nuclear layer, ONL: outer nuclear layer, RPE: retinal pigment epithelium.
The Degeneration Criteria Used to Implement the 4-Class Classification System
| Stage Number | Stage Name | Biological Features |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| Typical retinal layers observed (RPE, OS, ONL, OPL, INL, IPL, GCL), normal retinal lamination evident and the outer photoreceptors were organized. No sign of retinal damage (i.e., absence of a layer, low cell body density in nuclear layers, cell migration in plexiform layers). Some histological artifacts may be present but minimal. Some sections may be cut slightly obliquely. |
|
|
| Reduction in ONL thickness (compared to normal ONL thickness of 8–15 rows of nuclei) and/or nuclei density. Outer photoreceptor (outer and inner segment) and RPE disorganization as the previous class. Retinal lamination still observed with distinction between nuclear and plexiform layers evident. |
|
|
| Large reduction in ONL thickness and/or nuclear density (over half that of the normal retina). Further degenerative alterations to the outer segments and RPE. Retinal lamination no longer preserved; signs of discontinuity between nuclear and plexiform layers. |
|
|
| Complete loss of outer retinal layers including ONL, outer segments and RPE. No clear lamination of nuclear and plexiform layers. Evidence of cell migration. |
Observer Description
| Observer Number | Observer Alias | Observer Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | DA | Trained grader |
| 2 | MS | Trained grader and ophthalmology researcher |
| 3 | DN | Ophthalmology researcher |
| 4 | RW | Retinal pathology expert |
| 5 | LN-S | Ophthalmology researcher |
| 6 | MK | Retinal networks expert |
Figure 3.A general schematic of the convolutional neural network's architecture and the classification's end-to-end workflow. Each layer's input was equal to the previous layer's output, while its output size was equal to its assigned block's convolutional filter size (Table 3).
The 12 Different Architectures Used in the Architecture Search Experiments.
| Architecture Label | Number of Convolutional Blocks | Output Filter Size of Each Convolutional Block |
|---|---|---|
| Arch_01 | 2 | [64, 128] |
| Arch_02 | 3 | [64, 96, 128] |
| Arch_03 | 4 | [64, 96, 128, 256] |
| Arch_04 | 2 | [128, 256] |
| Arch_05 | 3 | [128, 256, 320] |
| Arch_06 | 4 | [128, 256, 320, 512] |
| Arch_07 | 2 | [256, 512] |
| Arch_08 | 3 | [256, 320, 512] |
| Arch_09 | 4 | [256, 320, 512, 1024] |
| Arch_10 | 2 | [512, 1024] |
| Arch_11 | 3 | [512, 720, 1024] |
| Arch_12 | 4 | [256, 512, 720, 1024] |
Figure 4.The mean weighted-F1 scores on the testing set for all architectures across the six observers.
Figure 5.Training and validation A) true accuracy and B) cross entropy log loss curve for RDP-Net.
Figure 7.Interobserver variability plots: A) The agreement heatmap between all observers and RDP-Net for the 85 testing set images, where each column represents a single image and a row represents an observer's classification for all 85 images. B) The Cohen kappa scores between all observers and RDP-Net. C) The weighted-F1 scores between the observers and RDP-Net, with the columns representing the true labels.
Figure 6.The confusion matrices which measured the agreement between; A) Observer 1's (DA) predictions and RDP-Net's labels, B) Observer 2's (MS) predictions and RDP-Net's labels, C) RDP-Net's predictions and Observer 1's true labels, D) RDP-Net's predictions and Observer 2's true labels.
Figure 8.(A) The Cohen kappa scores between all observers and RDP-Net when trained on a new training set with half the width of the original images. B) The mean weighted-F1 scores when RDP-Net was trained on different sizes of the original training set. An asterisk (*) indicates significant difference between the two associated groups (Tukey test, P < 0.05). The error bars represent standard errors.