The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Boosted Bayesian Multiresolution Classifier for Prostate Cancer Detection From Digitized Needle Biopsies
Abstract
Diagnosis of prostate cancer (CaP) currently involves examining tissue samples for CaP presence and extent via a microscope, a time-consuming and subjective process. With the advent of digital pathology, computer-aided algorithms can now be applied to disease detection on digitized glass slides. The size of these digitized histology images (hundreds of millions of pixels) presents a formidable challenge for any computerized image analysis program. In this paper, we present a boosted Bayesian multiresolution (BBMR) system to identify regions of CaP on digital biopsy slides. Such a system would serve as an important preceding step to a Gleason grading algorithm, where the objective would be to score the invasiveness and severity of the disease. In the first step, our algorithm decomposes the whole-slide image into an image pyramid comprising multiple resolution levels. Regions identified as cancer via a Bayesian classifier at lower resolution levels are subsequently examined in greater detail at higher resolution levels, thereby allowing for rapid and efficient analysis of large images. At each resolution level, ten image features are chosen from a pool of over 900 first-order statistical, second-order co-occurrence, and Gabor filter features using an AdaBoost ensemble method. The BBMR scheme, operating on 100 images obtained from 58 patients, yielded: 1) areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.83, and 0.76, respectively, at the lowest, intermediate, and highest resolution levels and 2) an eightfold savings in terms of computational time compared to running the algorithm directly at full (highest) resolution. The BBMR model outperformed (in terms of AUC): 1) individual features (no ensemble) and 2) a random forest classifier ensemble obtained by bagging multiple decision tree classifiers. The apparent drop-off in AUC at higher image resolutions is due to lack of fine detail in the expert annotation of CaP and is not an artifact of the classifier. The implicit feature selection done via the AdaBoost component of the BBMR classifier reveals that different classes and types of image features become more relevant for discriminating between CaP and benign areas at different image resolutions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms
Otsu, N. (1979) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1979.4310076 · Cited by 43,398
Textural Features for Image Classification
Haralick, R. M., Shanmugam, K., & Dinstein, I. (1973) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1973.4309314 · Cited by 22,886
(2012) · Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_5195 · Cited by 19,370
Robust Real-Time Face Detection
Viola, P., & Jones, M. J. (2004) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1023/b:visi.0000013087.49260.fb · Cited by 14,097
Geurts, P., Ernst, D., & Wehenkel, L. (2006) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-006-6226-1 · Cited by 9,300
The Laplacian pyramid as a compact image code
Burt, P., & Adelson, E. (1983) · IEEE Transactions on Communications · doi:10.1109/tcom.1983.1095851 · Cited by 6,077
Габор, Д. (1946) · Journal of the IEE · Cited by 5,036
Texture features for browsing and retrieval of image data
Manjunath, B. S., & Ma, W. Y. (1996) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.531803 · Cited by 3,727
Cited by
Artificial intelligence in digital pathology — new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology
Bera, K., Schalper, K. A., Rimm, D. L., Velcheti, V., & Madabhushi, A. (2019) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-019-0252-y · Cited by 1,698
Self-citationSpatial Heterogeneity in the Tumor Microenvironment
Yuan, Y. (2016) · Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a026583 · Cited by 342
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks Enable Discrimination of Heterogeneous Digital Pathology Images
Khosravi, P., Kazemi, E., Imielinski, M., Elemento, O., & Hajirasouliha, I. (2018) · EBioMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.12.026 · Cited by 334
Artificial intelligence in digital breast pathology: Techniques and applications
Ibrahim, A., Gamble, P., Jaroensri, R., Abdelsamea, M. M., Mermel, C. H., Chen, P.-H. C., & Rakha, E. A. (2020) · The Breast · doi:10.1016/j.breast.2019.12.007 · Cited by 202
“For an AI approach to segment biological structures, the performance is dependent on the fi delity of the annotations byexpert pathologists in the learning set [30,66].”
BackgroundSon, H., Kim, C., Hwang, N., Kim, C., & Kang, Y. (2014) · Advanced Engineering Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.aei.2013.10.001 · Cited by 74
Content-based image retrieval of digitized histopathology in boosted spectrally embedded spaces
Sridhar, A., Doyle, S., & Madabhushi, A. (2015) · Journal of Pathology Informatics · doi:10.4103/2153-3539.159441 · Cited by 34
Self-citationUnsupervised Learning Based on Multiple Descriptors for WSIs Diagnosis
Sheikh, T. S., Kim, J.-Y., Shim, J., & Cho, M. (2022) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics12061480 · Cited by 19
Qi, X., Karagoz, K., Ren, J., Foran, D. J., & Gatza, M. (2018) · Medical Imaging 2018: Imaging Informatics for Healthcare, Research, and Applications · doi:10.1117/12.2293193 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Doyle, S., Feldman, M., Tomaszewski, J., & Madabhushi, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1205-1218
- ISSN
- 0018-9294 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2531
- OpenAlex
- W2030041075
- Cited by
- 253
- References
- 33
- FWCI
- 17.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.