The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automatic Nuclei Segmentation in H&E Stained Breast Cancer Histopathology Images
Open accessAbstract
The introduction of fast digital slide scanners that provide whole slide images has led to a revival of interest in image analysis applications in pathology. Segmentation of cells and nuclei is an important first step towards automatic analysis of digitized microscopy images. We therefore developed an automated nuclei segmentation method that works with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained breast cancer histopathology images, which represent regions of whole digital slides. The procedure can be divided into four main steps: 1) pre-processing with color unmixing and morphological operators, 2) marker-controlled watershed segmentation at multiple scales and with different markers, 3) post-processing for rejection of false regions and 4) merging of the results from multiple scales. The procedure was developed on a set of 21 breast cancer cases (subset A) and tested on a separate validation set of 18 cases (subset B). The evaluation was done in terms of both detection accuracy (sensitivity and positive predictive value) and segmentation accuracy (Dice coefficient). The mean estimated sensitivity for subset A was 0.875 (±0.092) and for subset B 0.853 (±0.077). The mean estimated positive predictive value was 0.904 (±0.075) and 0.886 (±0.069) for subsets A and B, respectively. For both subsets, the distribution of the Dice coefficients had a high peak around 0.9, with the vast majority of segmentations having values larger than 0.8.
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
Image standards in tissue-based diagnosis (diagnostic surgical pathology)
Kayser, K., Görtler, J., Goldmann, T., Vollmer, E., Hufnagl, P., & Kayser, G. (2008) · Diagnostic Pathology · doi:10.1186/1746-1596-3-17 · Cited by 56
Cited by
Sirinukunwattana, K., Raza, S. E. A., Tsang, Y.-W., Snead, D. R. J., Cree, I. A., & Rajpoot, N. M. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2016.2525803 · Cited by 1,224
Kather, J. N., Krisam, J., Charoentong, P., Luedde, T., Herpel, E., Weis, C.-A., Gaiser, T., Marx, A., Valous, N. A., Ferber, D., et al. (2019) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002730 · Cited by 1,082
Breast Cancer Histopathology Image Analysis: A Review
Veta, M., Pluim, J. P. W., van Diest, P. J., & Viergever, M. A. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2014.2303852 · Cited by 696
Self-citationSegmentation of Nuclei in Histopathology Images by Deep Regression of the Distance Map
Naylor, P., Laé, M., Reyal, F., & Walter, T. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2018.2865709 · Cited by 685
A Multi-Organ Nucleus Segmentation Challenge
Kumar, N., Verma, R., Anand, D., Zhou, Y., Onder, O. F., Tsougenis, E., Chen, H., Heng, P.-A., Li, J., Hu, Z., et al. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2019.2947628 · Cited by 553
Metadata
- Authors
- Veta, M., van Diest, P. J., Kornegoor, R., Huisman, A., Viergever, M. A., & Pluim, J. P. W.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2013-07-29
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e70221
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1970120446
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automatic Nuclei Segmentation in H&E Stained Breast Cancer Histopathology Images. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0070221
- The paper
- Veta, M., van Diest, P. J., Kornegoor, R., Huisman, A., Viergever, M. A., & Pluim, J. P. W. (2013). Automatic Nuclei Segmentation in H&E Stained Breast Cancer Histopathology Images. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070221
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.