2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2014.11.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of algorithms for mitosis detection in breast cancer histopathology images

Abstract: The proliferative activity of breast tumors, which is routinely estimated by counting of mitotic figures in hematoxylin and eosin stained histology sections, is considered to be one of the most important prognostic markers. However, mitosis counting is laborious, subjective and may suffer from low inter-observer agreement. With the wider acceptance of whole slide images in pathology labs, automatic image analysis has been proposed as a potential solution for these issues. In this paper, the results from the As… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
292
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 403 publications
(312 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
4
292
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Analyses based on WSI images shows a higher degree of agreement when measuring expression of HER2 / Neu with the results of FISH gene amplification (fluorescence in situ hybridization) in breast cancer compared with the traditional assessment by microscopy [39]. Nevertheless, digital analysis is not fully effective for all its applications; for instance when measuring mitotic index , using the most advanced image analysis software, only a 80-85% agreement is reached when compared to conventional microscopy [40]. This aforementioned digital analysis is a very useful IT tool, but immunohistochemistry measurements represents only a small proportion of the pathologist's diagnostic workload.…”
Section: Digital Diagnosticsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Analyses based on WSI images shows a higher degree of agreement when measuring expression of HER2 / Neu with the results of FISH gene amplification (fluorescence in situ hybridization) in breast cancer compared with the traditional assessment by microscopy [39]. Nevertheless, digital analysis is not fully effective for all its applications; for instance when measuring mitotic index , using the most advanced image analysis software, only a 80-85% agreement is reached when compared to conventional microscopy [40]. This aforementioned digital analysis is a very useful IT tool, but immunohistochemistry measurements represents only a small proportion of the pathologist's diagnostic workload.…”
Section: Digital Diagnosticsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…We compared our approach with seven state-of-the-art approaches using the same MITOS dataset, developed by the research teams who participated in the ICPR 2012 [58] or/and MICCAI 2013 [60,64] competitions on mitosis detection and ranked as the top 7 best performing methods. The first approach (IDSIA) developed a pixel-based deep neural network framework to identify mitosis [20], which won the first place in both ICPR 2012 and MIC-CAI 2013 contests.…”
Section: Comparative Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The inconsistency of stain condition makes the appearances of H&E stained histology drastically different, so the classify performance was degraded [13] [14]. For instance, many false mitosis may arise when the histopathology slide is over-stained.…”
Section: Stain-normalization and Training Dataset Buildingmentioning
confidence: 99%