Towards grading gleason score using generically trained deep convolutional neural networks

We developed an automatic algorithm with the purpose to assist pathologists to report Gleason score on malignant prostatic adenocarcinoma specimen. In order to detect and classify the cancerous tissue, a deep convolutional neural network that had been pre-trained on a large set of photographic images was used. A specific aim was to support intuitive interaction with the result, to let pathologists adjust and correct the output. Therefore, we have designed an algorithm that makes a spatial classification of the whole slide into the same growth patterns as pathologists do. The 22-layer network was cut at an earlier layer and the output from that layer was used to train both a random forest classifier and a support vector machines classifier. At a specific layer a small patch of the image was used to calculate a feature vector and an image is represented by a number of those vectors. We have classified both the individual patches and the entire images. The classification results were compared for different scales of the images and feature vectors from two different layers from the network. Testing was made on a dataset consisting of 213 images, all containing a single class, benign tissue or Gleason score 35. Using 10-fold cross validation the accuracy per patch was 81 %. For whole images, the accuracy was increased to 89 %.

[1]  Daniel C. Alexander,et al.  Gleason Grading of Prostate Tumours with Max-Margin Conditional Random Fields , 2014, MLMI.

[2]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Prostate Histopathology: Learning Tissue Component Histograms for Cancer Detection and Classification , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[3]  Derek C. Rose,et al.  Deep Machine Learning - A New Frontier in Artificial Intelligence Research [Research Frontier] , 2010, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[4]  Corinna Cortes,et al.  Support-Vector Networks , 1995, Machine Learning.

[5]  Anant Madabhushi,et al.  Cascaded discrimination of normal, abnormal, and confounder classes in histopathology: Gleason grading of prostate cancer , 2012, BMC Bioinformatics.

[6]  Giuseppe Lippolis,et al.  Image analysis of prostate cancer tissue biomarkers , 2015 .

[7]  L. Egevad,et al.  The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma , 2005, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[8]  Xiang Zhang,et al.  OverFeat: Integrated Recognition, Localization and Detection using Convolutional Networks , 2013, ICLR.

[9]  L. Egevad,et al.  A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score. , 2016, European urology.

[10]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  A comparison of methods for multiclass support vector machines , 2002, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[11]  Atsuto Maki,et al.  Factors of Transferability for a Generic ConvNet Representation , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[12]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[13]  Brett Delahunt,et al.  Gleason grading: past, present and future , 2012, Histopathology.

[14]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition , 1998, Proc. IEEE.

[15]  Yann LeCun,et al.  Large-scale Learning with SVM and Convolutional for Generic Object Categorization , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).