Abstract
Purpose
Digital pathology diagnostics are often based on subjective qualitative measures. A murine model of early-phase pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma provides a controlled environment with a priori knowledge of the genetic mutation and stage of the disease. Use of this model enables the application of supervised learning methods to digital pathology. A computerized diagnostics system for histological detection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma was developed and tested.
Methods
Pathological H&E-stained specimens with early pancreatic lesions were identified and evaluated with a system that models cancer detection using a top-down object learning paradigm, mimicking the way a pathologist learns. First, the dominant primitives were identified and segmented in the images, i.e., the ducts, nuclei and tumor stroma. A boost-based machine learning technique was used for duct segmentation, classification and outlier pruning. Second, a set of morphological features traditionally used for cancer diagnosis which provides quantitative image features was employed to quantify subtle findings such as duct deformation and nuclei malformations. Finally, a visually interpretable predictive model was trained to distinguish between normal tissue and premalignant cancer lesions, given ground truth samples.
Results
A predictive success rate of 92 % was achieved using tenfold cross-validation and 93 % on an independent test set. Comparison was made with state-of-the-art classification algorithms that are not interpretable as visible features yielded the contribution of individual primitive features to the prediction outcome.
Conclusions
Quantitative image analysis and classification were successful in preclinical histology diagnosis for early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The usage of annotated contours coupled with interpretable supervised learning methods and outlier pruning can be adapted to other medical imaging tasks. The usage of interpretable supervised learning techniques may improve the success of CAD in histopathological diagnosis.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Roth D (2006) Learning based programming. In: Innovations in machine learning. Springer, Berlin, pp 73–95
Hidalgo M (2010) Pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 362(17):1605–1617
Hruban RH, Fukushima N (2007) Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: update on the surgical pathology of carcinomas of ductal origin and PanINs. Mod Pathol 20:S61–S70
Doi K (2007) Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: historical review, current status and future potential. Comput Med Imaging Graph 31(4–5):198–211
Fischer AH, Jacobson KA, Rose J, Zeller R (2008) Hematoxylin and eosin staining of tissue and cell sections. Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2008(5):pdb-prot4986
Sabata B (2012) Digital pathology imaging-the next frontier in medical imaging. In: 2012 international conference on advanced computer science and information systems (ICACSIS). IEEE, pp 1–6
Gurcan MN, Boucheron LE, Can A, Madabhushi A, Rajpoot NM, Yener B (2009) Histopathological image analysis: a review. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 2:147–171
Begelrnan G, Gur E, Rivlin E, Rudzsky M, Zalevsky Z (2004) Cell nuclei segmentation using fuzzy logic engine. In: 2004 international conference on image processing, 2004. ICIP’04, vol 5. IEEE, pp 2937–2940
Naik S, Doyle S, Agner S, Madabhushi A, Feldman M, Tomaszewski J (2008) Automated gland and nuclei segmentation for grading of prostate and breast cancer histopathology. In: 5th IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, 2008. ISBI 2008. IEEE, pp 284–287
Petushi S, Garcia FU, Haber MM, Katsinis C, Tozeren A (2006) Large-scale computations on histology images reveal grade-differentiating parameters for breast cancer. BMC Med Imaging 6(1):14
Bamford P, Lovell B (1998) Unsupervised cell nucleus segmentation with active contours. Signal Process 71(2):203–213
He L, Long LR, Antani S, Thoma GR (2012) Histology image analysis for carcinoma detection and grading. Comput Methods Progr Biomed 107(3):538–556
Doyle S, Hwang M, Shah K, Madabhushi A, Feldman M, Tomaszeweski J (2007) Automated grading of prostate cancer using architectural and textural image features. In: 4th IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, 2007. ISBI 2007. IEEE, pp 1284–1287
Doyle S, Feldman M, Tomaszewski J, Madabhushi A (2012) A boosted bayesian multiresolution classifier for prostate cancer detection from digitized needle biopsies. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(5):1205–1218
Gurcan MN, Pan T, Shimada H, Saltz J (2006) Image analysis for neuroblastoma classification: segmentation of cell nuclei. In: 28th annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, 2006. EMBS’06. IEEE, pp 4844–4847
Sertel O, Kong J, Shimada H, Catalyurek U, Saltz JH, Gurcan MN (2009) Computer-aided prognosis of neuroblastoma on whole-slide images: classification of stromal development. Pattern Recognit 42(6):1093–1103
Roullier V, Lézoray O, Ta VT, Elmoataz A (2011) Multi-resolution graph-based analysis of histopathological whole slide images: application to mitotic cell extraction and visualization. Comput Med Imaging Graph 35(7):603–615
Hingorani SR, Wang L, Multani AS, Combs C, Deramaudt TB, Hruban RH, Rustgi AK, Chang S, Tuveson DA (2005) Trp53R172H and KrasG12D cooperate to promote chromosomal instability and widely metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in mice. Cancer Cell 7(5):469–483
Collins MA, Bednar F, Zhang Y, Brisset JC, Galbán S, Galbán CJ, Rakshit S, Flannagan KS, Adsay NV, di Magliano MP (2012) Oncogenic Kras is required for both the initiation and maintenance of pancreatic cancer in mice. J Clin Investig 122(2):639
Olive KP, Tuveson DA (2006) The use of targeted mouse models for preclinical testing of novel cancer therapeutics. Clin Cancer Res 12(18):5277–5287
Fairchild MD (2013) Color appearance models. Wiley, New York
Rabinovich A, Agarwal S, Laris C, Price JH, Belongie S (2003) Unsupervised color decomposition of histologically stained tissue samples. In: Advances in neural information processing systems
Veta M, Huisman A, Viergever MA, van Diest P, Pluim JP (2011) Marker-controlled watershed segmentation of nuclei in h&e stained breast cancer biopsy images. In: 2011 IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro. IEEE, pp 618–621
Freund Y, Schapire RE (1995) A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting. In: Computational learning theory. Springer, pp 23–37
Vezhnevets A, Barinova O (2007) Avoiding boosting overfitting by removing confusing samples. In: Machine learning: ECML 2007. Springer, Berlin, pp 430–441
Beucher S et al (1992) The watershed transformation applied to image segmentation. Scanning Microsc Suppl 6, 299–299
Plissiti ME, Nikou C, Charchanti A (2010) Watershed-based segmentation of cell nuclei boundaries in pap smear images. In: 2010 10th IEEE international conference on information technology and applications in biomedicine (ITAB). IEEE, pp 1–4
Caruana R, Niculescu-Mizil A (2006) An empirical comparison of supervised learning algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning, ACM, pp 161–168
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Edith Suss-Toby, head of imaging and microscopy center of the biomedical core facility in the Bruce Rappaport faculty of medicine, for her tremendous contribution of knowledge and expertise in whole slide imaging.
Conflict of interest
Leeor Langer, Yoav Binenbaum, Leonid Gugel, Moran Amit, Ziv Gil and Shai Dekel declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Langer, L., Binenbaum, Y., Gugel, L. et al. Computer-aided diagnostics in digital pathology: automated evaluation of early-phase pancreatic cancer in mice. Int J CARS 10, 1043–1054 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1122-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1122-9