Geoffrey F Schau1,2, Erik A Burlingame1,2, Guillaume Thibault2, Tauangtham Anekpuritanang3,4, Ying Wang3, Joe W Gray2,5, Christopher Corless3,5,6, Young H Chang1,2,5. 1. Oregon Health and Science University, Computational Biology Program, Biomedical Engineering Department, Portland, Oregon, United States. 2. Oregon Health and Science University, OHSU Center for Spatial Systems Biomedicine, Biomedical Engineering Department, Portland, Oregon, United States. 3. Oregon Health and Science University, Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Portland, Oregon, United States. 4. Mahidol University, Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. 5. Oregon Health and Science University, Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon, United States. 6. Oregon Health and Science University, Department of Pathology, Portland, Oregon, United States.
Abstract
Purpose: Pathologists rely on relevant clinical information, visual inspection of stained tissue slide morphology, and sophisticated molecular diagnostics to accurately infer the biological origin of secondary metastatic cancer. While highly effective, this process is expensive in terms of time and clinical resources. We seek to develop and evaluate a computer vision system designed to reasonably infer metastatic origin of secondary liver cancer directly from digitized histopathological whole slide images of liver biopsy. Approach: We illustrate a two-stage deep learning approach to accomplish this task. We first train a model to identify spatially localized regions of cancerous tumor within digitized hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained tissue sections of secondary liver cancer based on a pathologist's annotation of several whole slide images. Then, a second model is trained to generate predictions of the cancers' metastatic origin belonging to one of three distinct clinically relevant classes as confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Results: Our approach achieves a classification accuracy of 90.2% in determining metastatic origin of whole slide images from a held-out test set, which compares favorably to an established clinical benchmark by three board-certified pathologists whose accuracies ranged from 90.2% to 94.1% on the same prediction task. Conclusions: We illustrate the potential impact of deep learning systems to leverage morphological and structural features of H&E-stained tissue sections to guide pathological and clinical determination of the metastatic origin of secondary liver cancers.
Purpose: Pathologists rely on relevant clinical information, visual inspection of stained tissue slide morphology, and sophisticated molecular diagnostics to accurately infer the biological origin of secondary metastatic cancer. While highly effective, this process is expensive in terms of time and clinical resources. We seek to develop and evaluate a computer vision system designed to reasonably infer metastatic origin of secondary liver cancer directly from digitized histopathological whole slide images of liver biopsy. Approach: We illustrate a two-stage deep learning approach to accomplish this task. We first train a model to identify spatially localized regions of cancerous tumor within digitized hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained tissue sections of secondary liver cancer based on a pathologist's annotation of several whole slide images. Then, a second model is trained to generate predictions of the cancers' metastatic origin belonging to one of three distinct clinically relevant classes as confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Results: Our approach achieves a classification accuracy of 90.2% in determining metastatic origin of whole slide images from a held-out test set, which compares favorably to an established clinical benchmark by three board-certified pathologists whose accuracies ranged from 90.2% to 94.1% on the same prediction task. Conclusions: We illustrate the potential impact of deep learning systems to leverage morphological and structural features of H&E-stained tissue sections to guide pathological and clinical determination of the metastatic origin of secondary liver cancers.
Authors: Mohammad Havaei; Axel Davy; David Warde-Farley; Antoine Biard; Aaron Courville; Yoshua Bengio; Chris Pal; Pierre-Marc Jodoin; Hugo Larochelle Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Jakob Nikolas Kather; Johannes Krisam; Pornpimol Charoentong; Tom Luedde; Esther Herpel; Cleo-Aron Weis; Timo Gaiser; Alexander Marx; Nektarios A Valous; Dyke Ferber; Lina Jansen; Constantino Carlos Reyes-Aldasoro; Inka Zörnig; Dirk Jäger; Hermann Brenner; Jenny Chang-Claude; Michael Hoffmeister; Niels Halama Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Nicolas Coudray; Paolo Santiago Ocampo; Theodore Sakellaropoulos; Navneet Narula; Matija Snuderl; David Fenyö; Andre L Moreira; Narges Razavian; Aristotelis Tsirigos Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Geert Litjens; Clara I Sánchez; Nadya Timofeeva; Meyke Hermsen; Iris Nagtegaal; Iringo Kovacs; Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Peter Bult; Bram van Ginneken; Jeroen van der Laak Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jeffrey J Nirschl; Andrew Janowczyk; Eliot G Peyster; Renee Frank; Kenneth B Margulies; Michael D Feldman; Anant Madabhushi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 3.240