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 2008.09352eess.IVcs.CV

Deep Learning Methods for Lung Cancer Segmentation in Whole-slide Histopathology Images -- the ACDC@LungHP Challenge 2019

College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology(国防科技大学航空航天科学与工程学院);Eindhoven University of Technology(埃因霍温理工大学);ScreenPoint Medical(ScreenPoint Medical 公司);Pingan Technology(平安科技);Lunit Inc.(Lunit 公司);Queen Mary University of London(伦敦玛丽女王大学);Beihang University(北京航空航天大学);Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Biomedical Engineering(北京生物医学工程高精尖创新中心)
Zhang Li, Jiehua Zhang, Tao Tan, Xichao Teng, Xiaoliang Sun, Yang Li, Lihong Liu, Yang Xiao, Byungjae Lee, Yilong Li, Qianni Zhang, Shujiao Sun, Yushan Zheng, J… 展开作者

Zhang Li, Jiehua Zhang, Tao Tan, Xichao Teng, Xiaoliang Sun, Yang Li, Lihong Liu, Yang Xiao, Byungjae Lee, Yilong Li, Qianni Zhang, Shujiao Sun, Yushan Zheng, Junyu Yan, Ni Li, Yiyu Hong, Junsu Ko, Hyun Jung, Yanling Liu, Yu-cheng Chen, Ching-wei Wang, Vladimir Yurovskiy, Pavel Maevskikh, Vahid Khanagha, Yi Jiang, Xiangjun Feng, Zhihong Liu, Daiqiang Li, Peter J. Schüffler, Qifeng Yu, Hui Chen, Yuling Tang, Geert Litjens

英文摘要:

Accurate segmentation of lung cancer in pathology slides is a critical step in improving patient care. We proposed the ACDC@LungHP (Automatic Cancer Detection and Classification in Whole-slide Lung Histopathology) challenge for evaluating different computer-aided diagnosis (CADs) methods on the automatic diagnosis of lung cancer. The ACDC@LungHP 2019 focused on segmentation (pixel-wise detection) of cancer tissue in whole slide imaging (WSI), using an annotated dataset of 150 training images and 50 test images from 200 patients. This paper reviews this challenge and summarizes the top 10 submitted methods for lung cancer segmentation. All methods were evaluated using the false positive rate, false negative rate, and DICE coefficient (DC). The DC ranged from 0.7354$\pm$0.1149 to 0.8372$\pm$0.0858. The DC of the best method was close to the inter-observer agreement (0.8398$\pm$0.0890). All methods were based on deep learning and categorized into two groups: multi-model method and single model method. In general, multi-model methods were significantly better ($\textit{p}$<$0.01$) than single model methods, with mean DC of 0.7966 and 0.7544, respectively. Deep learning based methods could potentially help pathologists find suspicious regions for further analysis of lung cancer in WSI.

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。

↑