The DOI matches its DataCite record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting Cancer Metastases on Gigapixel Pathology Images
Open accessAbstract
Each year, the treatment decisions for more than 230,000 breast cancer patients in the U.S. hinge on whether the cancer has metastasized away from the breast. Metastasis detection is currently performed by pathologists reviewing large expanses of biological tissues. This process is labor intensive and error-prone. We present a framework to automatically detect and localize tumors as small as 100 x 100 pixels in gigapixel microscopy images sized 100,000 x 100,000 pixels. Our method leverages a convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture and obtains state-of-the-art results on the Camelyon16 dataset in the challenging lesion-level tumor detection task. At 8 false positives per image, we detect 92.4% of the tumors, relative to 82.7% by the previous best automated approach. For comparison, a human pathologist attempting exhaustive search achieved 73.2% sensitivity. We achieve image-level AUC scores above 97% on both the Camelyon16 test set and an independent set of 110 slides. In addition, we discover that two slides in the Camelyon16 training set were erroneously labeled normal. Our approach could considerably reduce false negative rates in metastasis detection.
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Many specialized methods have been developed to handle stain variation in the context of digital histopathology.”
From WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts (2020) · cites this paper as Liu et al. (2017)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These typically fall into one of two categories: data augmentation methods that perturb the colors in the training images (e.g., Liu et al. (2017); Bug et al. (2017); Tellez et al. (2018)) or stain normalization methods that seek to standardize colors across training images (e.g., Macenko et al. (2009); BenTaieb and Hamarneh (2017)).”
From WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts (2020) · cites this paper as Liu et al. (2017)
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
Going deeper with convolutions
Szegedy, C., Liu, W., Jia, Y., Sermanet, P., Reed, S., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Vanhoucke, V., & Rabinovich, A. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298594 · Cited by 48,562
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 · Cited by 21,856
Deep Learning for Identifying Metastatic Breast CancerPreprint
Wang, D., Khosla, A., Gargeya, R., Irshad, H., & Beck, A. H. (2016) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1606.05718 · Cited by 1,028
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- [3]3. Apple, S.K.: Sentinel lymph node in breast cancer: Review article from a pathologists point of view. J. of Pathol. and Transl. Medicine 50(2), 83 (2016)
- [4]4. Bejnordi, B.E., et al.: Stain specific standardization of whole-slide histopathological images. IEEE Trans. on Medical Imaging 35(2), 404-415 (2016)
- [5]5. Bunch, P.C., et al.: A free response approach to the measurement and characterization of radiographic observer performance. Appl. of Opt. Instrum. in Medicine VI pp. 124-135 (1977)
- [6]6. Cire¸ san, D.C., et al.: Mitosis detection in breast cancer histology images with deep neural networks. Int. Conf. on Medical Image Comput. and Comput. Interv. (2013)
- [9]9. Gulshan, V., et al.: Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs. J. of the Am. Medical Soc. 316(22), 2402-2410 (2016)
- [11]11. Ioffe, S., Szegedy, C.: Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. Int. Conf. on Machine Learning (2015)
- [13]13. Kothari, S., et al.: Pathology imaging informatics for quantitative analysis of wholeslide images. J. of the Am. Medical Informatics Assoc. 20(6), 1099-1108 (2013)
- [14]14. Krizhevsky, A., et al.: Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Adv. in Neural Inf. Process. Syst. pp. 1097-1105 (2012)
- [15]15. van der Laak, J.A., et al.: Hue-saturation-density model for stain recognition in digital images from transmitted light microscopy. Cytometry 39(4), 275-284 (2000)
- [19]19. Russakovsky, O., et al.: Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge. Int. J. of Comput. Vis. 115(3), 211-252 (2015)
- [22]22. Veta, M., et al.: Assessment of algorithms for mitosis detection in breast cancer histopathology images. Medical image analysis 20(1), 237-248 (2015)
- [24]24. Yosinski, J., et al.: How transferable are features in deep neural networks? Adv. in Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (2014)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis
Litjens, G., Kooi, T., Bejnordi, B. E., Setio, A. A. A., Ciompi, F., Ghafoorian, M., van der Laak, J. A. W. M., van Ginneken, B., & Sánchez, C. I. (2017) · Medical Image Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.media.2017.07.005 · Cited by 15,332
A guide to deep learning in healthcare
Esteva, A., Robicquet, A., Ramsundar, B., Kuleshov, V., DePristo, M., Chou, K., Cui, C., Corrado, G., Thrun, S., & Dean, J. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0316-z · Cited by 5,312
Self-citationClinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images
Campanella, G., Hanna, M. G., Geneslaw, L., Miraflor, A., Werneck Krauss Silva, V., Busam, K. J., Brogi, E., Reuter, V. E., Klimstra, D. S., & Fuchs, T. J. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0508-1 · Cited by 2,799
A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Toward Medical XAI
Tjoa, E., & Guan, C. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2020.3027314 · Cited by 2,524
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, Y., Gadepalli, K., Norouzi, M., Dahl, G. E., Kohlberger, T., Boyko, A., Venugopalan, S., Timofeev, A., Nelson, P. Q., Corrado, G. S., Hipp, J. D., Peng, L., & Stumpe, M. C.
- Affiliations
- Google (United States) (US)
- Verily Life Sciences LLC (United States) (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2017
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1703.02442
- OpenAlex
- W2593345132
- Cited by
- 506
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 103 · 2019: 102 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 14
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Cell Image Analysis Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Imaging for Blood Diseases
- Keywords
- tumor localization, Camelyon16, convolutional neural networks, automated histopathology, false positive reduction, slide-level classification
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
