Cited by 68AI in cancer detectionMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment

Deep-learning-based Accurate Hepatic Steatosis Quantification for Histological Assessment of Liver Biopsies

Open access
Roy, Mousumi, Wang, Fusheng, Vo, Hoang, Teng, Dejun, Teodoro, George, Farris, Alton B., Castillo-Leon, Eduardo, Vos, Miriam B. +1 more·2020·Laboratory Investigation

Abstract

Hepatic steatosis droplet quantification with histology biopsies has high clinical significance for risk stratification and management of patients with fatty liver diseases and in the decision to use donor livers for transplantation. However, pathology reviewing processes, when conducted manually, are subject to a high inter- and intra-reader variability, due to the overwhelmingly large number and significantly varying appearance of steatosis instances. This process is challenging as there is a large number of overlapped steatosis droplets with either missing or weak boundaries. In this study, we propose a deep-learning-based region-boundary integrated network for precise steatosis quantification with whole slide liver histopathology images. The proposed model consists of two sequential steps: a region extraction and a boundary prediction module for foreground regions and steatosis boundary prediction, followed by an integrated prediction map generation. Missing steatosis boundaries are next recovered from the predicted map and assembled from adjacent image patches to generate results for the whole slide histopathology image. The resulting steatosis measures both at the pixel level and steatosis object-level present strong correlation with pathologist annotations, radiology readouts and clinical data. In addition, the segregated steatosis object count is shown as a promising alternative measure to the traditional metrics at the pixel level. These results suggest a high potential of artificial intelligence-assisted technology to enhance liver disease decision support using whole slide images.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41374-020-0463-y

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roy, M., Wang, F., Vo, H., Teng, D., Teodoro, G., Farris, A. B., Castillo-Leon, E., Vos, M. B., & Kong, J.
Affiliations
  • Stony Brook University (US)
  • Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Wang, Fusheng
  • Kong, Jun
Venue
Laboratory Investigation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-10
Volume
100
Issue
10
Pages
1367-1383
ISSN
0023-6837 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3042325762
Cited by
68
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Laboratory Investigation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1350885, 1443054)
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY028450)
  • National Cancer Institute (U01CA242936, K25CA181503)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
hepatic steatosis, liver biopsy, whole slide images, region extraction, clinical decision support
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Algorithms, Biopsy, Fatty Liver, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Liver, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Software

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review