arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 1910.04918q-bio.TOcs.CVcs.LGeess.IV

Deep Learning for Prostate Pathology

Stanford University School of Medicine(斯坦福大学医学院);Stanford University(斯坦福大学);Bonn University Hospital(波恩大学医院);Institute for Pathology and Cytology(病理与细胞学研究所);University Hospital Muenster(明斯特大学医院)
Okyaz Eminaga, Yuri Tolkach, Christian Kunder, Mahmood Abbas, Ryan Han, Rosalie Nolley, Axel Semjonow, Martin Boegemann, Sebastian Huss, Andreas Loening, Robert… 展开作者

Okyaz Eminaga, Yuri Tolkach, Christian Kunder, Mahmood Abbas, Ryan Han, Rosalie Nolley, Axel Semjonow, Martin Boegemann, Sebastian Huss, Andreas Loening, Robert West, Geoffrey Sonn, Richard Fan, Olaf Bettendorf, James Brook, Daniel Rubin

英文摘要:

The current study detects different morphologies related to prostate pathology using deep learning models; these models were evaluated on 2,121 hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain histology images captured using bright field microscopy, which spanned a variety of image qualities, origins (whole slide, tissue micro array, whole mount, Internet), scanning machines, timestamps, H&E staining protocols, and institutions. For case usage, these models were applied for the annotation tasks in clinician-oriented pathology reports for prostatectomy specimens. The true positive rate (TPR) for slides with prostate cancer was 99.7% by a false positive rate of 0.785%. The F1-scores of Gleason patterns reported in pathology reports ranged from 0.795 to 1.0 at the case level. TPR was 93.6% for the cribriform morphology and 72.6% for the ductal morphology. The correlation between the ground truth and the prediction for the relative tumor volume was 0.987 n. Our models cover the major components of prostate pathology and successfully accomplish the annotation tasks.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑