Cited by 109AI in cancer detectionRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques

Representation Learning of Histopathology Images using Graph Neural Networks

Open access
Adnan, Mohammed, Kalra, Shivam, Tizhoosh, Hamid R.·2020·2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)

Abstract

Representation learning for Whole Slide Images (WSIs) is pivotal in developing image-based systems to achieve higher precision in diagnostic pathology. We propose a two-stage framework for WSI representation learning. We sample relevant patches using a color-based method and use graph neural networks to learn relations among sampled patches to aggregate the image information into a single vector representation. We introduce attention via graph pooling to automatically infer patches with higher relevance. We demonstrate the performance of our approach for discriminating two sub-types of lung cancers, Lung Adenocarcinoma (LUAD) & Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma (LUSC). We collected 1,026 lung cancer WSIs with the 40× magnification from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset, the largest public repository of histopathology images and achieved state-of-the-art accuracy of 88.8% and AUC of 0.89 on lung cancer sub-type classification by extracting features from a pre-trained DenseNet model.

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 · 10.1109/cvprw50498.2020.00502

Cites

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?

  • Adnan et al. demonstrated an application of graph convolution neural networks to MIL in digital pathology and achieved state of the art accuracy on a lung sub cancer classification task.

    “Adnan et al. 32 demonstrated an application of graph convolution neural networks to MIL in digital pathology and achieved state of the art accuracy on a lung sub cancer classification task.”
  • Fusing compound sequence, structure, and clinical implications has significantly improved drug-drug and drug-target interaction predictions.

    “Fusing compound sequence, structure, and clinical implications has significantly improved drug-drug and drug-target interaction predictions.”

    From Graph representation learning in biomedicine and healthcare (2022) · cites this paper as [176]

  • Protein structure representations generated by graph convolutions combined with protein sequence representations can predict the probability of compound-protein interactions.

    “To be flexible with other graph- and non-graph-based methods, protein structure representations generated by graph convolutions has been combined with protein sequence representations (e.g., shallow network embedding methods or CNNs) to predict the probability of compound-protein interactions [174, 175, 176, 177].”

    From Graph representation learning in biomedicine and healthcare (2022) · cites this paper as [176]

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 109

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Michaël Defferrard, Xavier Bresson, and Pierre Van- dergheynst. Convolutional neural networks on graphs with fast localized spectral filtering. In Advances in neural infor- mation processing systems, pages 3844-3852, 2016. 3
  2. Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, Laurens Van Der Maaten, and Kil- ian Q Weinberger. Densely connected convolutional net- works. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4700-4708, 2017. 3, 5, 6
  3. Manzil Zaheer, Satwik Kottur, Siamak Ravanbakhsh, Barn- abas Poczos, Russ R Salakhutdinov, and Alexander J Smola. Deep sets. In Advances in neural information processing systems, pages 3391-3401, 2017. 3, 4

Authors
Adnan, M., Kalra, S., & Tizhoosh, H. R.
Affiliations
University of Waterloo (CA)
Venue
2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-06
Pages
4254-4261
OpenAlex
W3016852577
Cited by
109
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.63
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Keywords
whole slide images, histopathological images, representation learning, graph neural networks, graph pooling, attention, patch sampling, lung cancer subtypes, lung adenocarcinoma, lung squamous cell carcinoma, cancer subtyping, TCGA

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