skip to main content
10.1145/3469951.3469960acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesipmvConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Reducing the Annotation Cost of Whole Slide Histology Images using Active Learning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 August 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Histopathology serves as the gold standard for tumor diagnosis. Whole slide scanners have made computer vision-based methods available for pathologists to locate regions of high diagnostic significance. An essential step of whole slide image (WSI) diagnosis is the segmentation of the tumor region by generating a tumor probability heatmap. Most WSI diagnosis methods use patch-based classifiers or segmentation models, they both require a large set of training patches from annotated WSIs. Annotating WSIs is time-consuming and laborious. Active learning is a method that can suggest the most informative unlabeled data for annotation, but traditional active learning methods are not directly applicable for WSIs. Meanwhile, unannotated WSIs also contain rich information that can be further exploited by self-supervised learning. By utilizing unannotated data alongside active learning, we proposed a self-supervised active learning framework for tumor region segmentation of WSIs. The proposed method is evaluated on the public available CAMELYON dataset and achieved satisfying performance using 3% of the annotated data.

References

  1. Babak Ehteshami Bejnordi, Mitko Veta, Paul Johannes Van Diest, Bram Van Ginneken, Nico Karssemeijer, Geert Litjens, Jeroen AWM Van Der Laak, Meyke Hermsen, Quirine F Manson, Maschenka Balkenhol, 2017. Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer. Jama 318, 22 (2017), 2199–2210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Samuel Budd, Emma C Robinson, and Bernhard Kainz. 2019. A survey on active learning and human-in-the-loop deep learning for medical image analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.02923(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jacob Carse and Stephen McKenna. 2019. Active Learning for Patch-Based Digital Pathology Using Convolutional Neural Networks to Reduce Annotation Costs. In European Congress on Digital Pathology. Springer, 20–27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Carl Doersch, Abhinav Gupta, and Alexei A Efros. 2015. Unsupervised visual representation learning by context prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. 1422–1430.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jonathan Folmsbee, Xulei Liu, Margaret Brandwein-Weber, and Scott Doyle. 2018. Active deep learning: Improved training efficiency of convolutional neural networks for tissue classification in oral cavity cancer. In 2018 IEEE 15th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI 2018). IEEE, 770–773.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Spyros Gidaris, Praveer Singh, and Nikos Komodakis. 2018. Unsupervised representation learning by predicting image rotations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.07728(2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 770–778.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Le Hou, Dimitris Samaras, Tahsin M Kurc, Yi Gao, James E Davis, and Joel H Saltz. 2016. Patch-based convolutional neural network for whole slide tissue image classification. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2424–2433.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems 25 (2012), 1097–1105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yi Li and Wei Ping. 2018. Cancer metastasis detection with neural conditional random field. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.07064(2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Tsung-Yi Lin, Piotr Dollár, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, Bharath Hariharan, and Serge Belongie. 2017. Feature pyramid networks for object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2117–2125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Geert Litjens, Peter Bandi, Babak Ehteshami Bejnordi, Oscar Geessink, Maschenka Balkenhol, Peter Bult, Altuna Halilovic, Meyke Hermsen, Rob van de Loo, Rob Vogels, 2018. 1399 H&E-stained sentinel lymph node sections of breast cancer patients: the CAMELYON dataset. GigaScience 7, 6 (2018), giy065.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Yun Liu, Krishna Gadepalli, Mohammad Norouzi, George E Dahl, Timo Kohlberger, Aleksey Boyko, Subhashini Venugopalan, Aleksei Timofeev, Philip Q Nelson, Greg S Corrado, 2017. Detecting cancer metastases on gigapixel pathology images. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.02442(2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Kay RJ Oskal, Martin Risdal, Emilius AM Janssen, Erling S Undersrud, and Thor O Gulsrud. 2019. A U-net based approach to epidermal tissue segmentation in whole slide histopathological images. SN Applied Sciences 1, 7 (2019), 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Deepak Pathak, Philipp Krahenbuhl, Jeff Donahue, Trevor Darrell, and Alexei A Efros. 2016. Context encoders: Feature learning by inpainting. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2536–2544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. 2015. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, 234–241.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Korsuk Sirinukunwattana, Josien PW Pluim, Hao Chen, Xiaojuan Qi, Pheng-Ann Heng, Yun Bo Guo, Li Yang Wang, Bogdan J Matuszewski, Elia Bruni, Urko Sanchez, 2017. Gland segmentation in colon histology images: The glas challenge contest. Medical image analysis 35 (2017), 489–502.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Dayong Wang, Aditya Khosla, Rishab Gargeya, Humayun Irshad, and Andrew H Beck. 2016. Deep learning for identifying metastatic breast cancer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.05718(2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Xi Wang, Hao Chen, Caixia Gan, Huangjing Lin, Qi Dou, Efstratios Tsougenis, Qitao Huang, Muyan Cai, and Pheng-Ann Heng. 2019. Weakly supervised deep learning for whole slide lung cancer image analysis. IEEE transactions on cybernetics 50, 9 (2019), 3950–3962.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Yan Xu, Tao Mo, Qiwei Feng, Peilin Zhong, Maode Lai, I Eric, and Chao Chang. 2014. Deep learning of feature representation with multiple instance learning for medical image analysis. In 2014 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 1626–1630.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Lin Yang, Yizhe Zhang, Jianxu Chen, Siyuan Zhang, and Danny Z Chen. 2017. Suggestive annotation: A deep active learning framework for biomedical image segmentation. In International conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, 399–407.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Zhun Zhong, Liang Zheng, Guoliang Kang, Shaozi Li, and Yi Yang. 2020. Random erasing data augmentation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 34. 13001–13008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Bolei Zhou, Aditya Khosla, Agata Lapedriza, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. 2016. Learning deep features for discriminative localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2921–2929.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    IPMV '21: Proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on Image Processing and Machine Vision
    May 2021
    87 pages
    ISBN:9781450390040
    DOI:10.1145/3469951

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 21 August 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format