Abstract
Abstract
Background
Nuclei classification, segmentation, and detection from pathological images are challenging tasks due to cellular heterogeneity in the Whole Slide Images (WSI).
Methods
In this work, we propose advanced DCNN models for nuclei classification, segmentation, and detection tasks. The Densely Connected Neural Network (DCNN) and Densely Connected Recurrent Convolutional Network (DCRN) models are applied for the nuclei classification tasks. The Recurrent Residual U-Net (R2U-Net) and the R2UNet-based regression model named the University of Dayton Net (UD-Net) are applied for nuclei segmentation and detection tasks respectively. The experiments are conducted on publicly available datasets, including Routine Colon Cancer (RCC) classification and detection and the Nuclei Segmentation Challenge 2018 datasets for segmentation tasks. The experimental results were evaluated with a five-fold cross-validation method, and the average testing results are compared against the existing approaches in terms of precision, recall, Dice Coefficient (DC), Mean Squared Error (MSE), F1-score, and overall testing accuracy by calculating pixels and cell-level analysis.
Results
The results demonstrate around 2.6% and 1.7% higher performance in terms of F1-score for nuclei classification and detection tasks when compared to the recently published DCNN based method. Also, for nuclei segmentation, the R2U-Net shows around 91.90% average testing accuracy in terms of DC, which is around 1.54% higher than the U-Net model.
Conclusion
The proposed methods demonstrate robustness with better quantitative and qualitative results in three different tasks for analyzing the WSI.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Medicine,Histology,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference46 articles.
1. Van Norman GA. Drugs, devices, and the fda: part 1: an overview of approval processes for drugs. JACC: Basic to Transl Sci. 2016;1(3):170–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2016.03.002.
2. Rojo MG, Punys V, Slodkowska J, Schrader T, Daniel C, Blobel B. Digital pathology in europe: coordinating patient care and research efforts. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;150:997–1001.
3. Rojo MG. State of the art and trends for digital pathology. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;179:15–28.
4. Pantanowitz L, Sinard JH, Henricks WH, Fatheree LA, Carter AB, Contis L, et al. Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from Alom et al. Page 20 of 21 the college of american pathologists pathology and laboratory quality center. Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine. 2013;137(12):1710–22.
5. L’opez C, Lejeune M, Bosch R, Korzynska A, Garc’ıa-Rojo M, Salvad’o M-T, et al. Digital image analysis in breast cancer: an example of an automated methodology and the effects of image compression. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;179:155–71.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献