人工智能在人类前列腺切除术标本中前列腺癌检测和分级的价值:一项验证研究。

IF 2.6 Q1 SURGERY Patient Safety in Surgery Pub Date : 2022-11-23 DOI:10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6
Maíra Suzuka Kudo, Vinicius Meneguette Gomes de Souza, Carmen Liane Neubarth Estivallet, Henrique Alves de Amorim, Fernando J Kim, Katia Ramos Moreira Leite, Matheus Cardoso Moraes
{"title":"人工智能在人类前列腺切除术标本中前列腺癌检测和分级的价值:一项验证研究。","authors":"Maíra Suzuka Kudo,&nbsp;Vinicius Meneguette Gomes de Souza,&nbsp;Carmen Liane Neubarth Estivallet,&nbsp;Henrique Alves de Amorim,&nbsp;Fernando J Kim,&nbsp;Katia Ramos Moreira Leite,&nbsp;Matheus Cardoso Moraes","doi":"10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Gleason grading system is an important clinical practice for diagnosing prostate cancer in pathology images. However, this analysis results in significant variability among pathologists, hence creating possible negative clinical impacts. Artificial intelligence methods can be an important support for the pathologist, improving Gleason grade classifications. Consequently, our purpose is to construct and evaluate the potential of a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to classify Gleason patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The methodology included 6982 image patches with cancer, extracted from radical prostatectomy specimens previously analyzed by an expert uropathologist. A CNN was constructed to accurately classify the corresponding Gleason. The evaluation was carried out by computing the corresponding 3 classes confusion matrix; thus, calculating the percentage of precision, sensitivity, and specificity, as well as the overall accuracy. Additionally, k-fold three-way cross-validation was performed to enhance evaluation, allowing better interpretation and avoiding possible bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall accuracy reached 98% for the training and validation stage, and 94% for the test phase. Considering the test samples, the true positive ratio between pathologist and computer method was 85%, 93%, and 96% for specific Gleason patterns. Finally, precision, sensitivity, and specificity reached values up to 97%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CNN model presented and evaluated has shown high accuracy for specifically pattern neighbors and critical Gleason patterns. The outcomes are in line and complement others in the literature. The promising results surpassed current inter-pathologist congruence in classical reports, evidencing the potential of this novel technology in daily clinical aspects.</p>","PeriodicalId":46782,"journal":{"name":"Patient Safety in Surgery","volume":"16 1","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9686032/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of artificial intelligence for detection and grading of prostate cancer in human prostatectomy specimens: a validation study.\",\"authors\":\"Maíra Suzuka Kudo,&nbsp;Vinicius Meneguette Gomes de Souza,&nbsp;Carmen Liane Neubarth Estivallet,&nbsp;Henrique Alves de Amorim,&nbsp;Fernando J Kim,&nbsp;Katia Ramos Moreira Leite,&nbsp;Matheus Cardoso Moraes\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Gleason grading system is an important clinical practice for diagnosing prostate cancer in pathology images. However, this analysis results in significant variability among pathologists, hence creating possible negative clinical impacts. Artificial intelligence methods can be an important support for the pathologist, improving Gleason grade classifications. Consequently, our purpose is to construct and evaluate the potential of a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to classify Gleason patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The methodology included 6982 image patches with cancer, extracted from radical prostatectomy specimens previously analyzed by an expert uropathologist. A CNN was constructed to accurately classify the corresponding Gleason. The evaluation was carried out by computing the corresponding 3 classes confusion matrix; thus, calculating the percentage of precision, sensitivity, and specificity, as well as the overall accuracy. Additionally, k-fold three-way cross-validation was performed to enhance evaluation, allowing better interpretation and avoiding possible bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall accuracy reached 98% for the training and validation stage, and 94% for the test phase. Considering the test samples, the true positive ratio between pathologist and computer method was 85%, 93%, and 96% for specific Gleason patterns. Finally, precision, sensitivity, and specificity reached values up to 97%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CNN model presented and evaluated has shown high accuracy for specifically pattern neighbors and critical Gleason patterns. The outcomes are in line and complement others in the literature. The promising results surpassed current inter-pathologist congruence in classical reports, evidencing the potential of this novel technology in daily clinical aspects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9686032/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Safety in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:Gleason分级系统是前列腺癌病理影像诊断的重要临床手段。然而,这种分析导致病理学家之间存在显著差异,因此可能产生负面的临床影响。人工智能方法可以成为病理学家的重要支持,改进Gleason分级。因此,我们的目的是构建和评估卷积神经网络(CNN)分类Gleason模式的潜力。方法:方法包括6982个肿瘤图像片,这些图像片是从一名泌尿病理学专家先前分析的根治性前列腺切除术标本中提取的。构造CNN对相应的Gleason进行准确分类。通过计算相应的3类混淆矩阵进行评价;因此,计算的精度,灵敏度和特异性的百分比,以及整体的准确性。此外,进行k-fold三向交叉验证以增强评估,允许更好的解释并避免可能的偏差。结果:训练和验证阶段的总体准确率达到98%,测试阶段的总体准确率达到94%。考虑到检测样本,对于特定的Gleason模式,病理学和计算机方法的真阳性率分别为85%、93%和96%。最后,精密度、灵敏度和特异性达到97%。结论:所提出和评估的CNN模型对特定模式邻居和关键Gleason模式具有较高的准确性。结果是一致的,并补充了其他文献。这些有希望的结果超越了目前在经典报告中病理学家之间的一致性,证明了这种新技术在日常临床方面的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The value of artificial intelligence for detection and grading of prostate cancer in human prostatectomy specimens: a validation study.

Background: The Gleason grading system is an important clinical practice for diagnosing prostate cancer in pathology images. However, this analysis results in significant variability among pathologists, hence creating possible negative clinical impacts. Artificial intelligence methods can be an important support for the pathologist, improving Gleason grade classifications. Consequently, our purpose is to construct and evaluate the potential of a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to classify Gleason patterns.

Methods: The methodology included 6982 image patches with cancer, extracted from radical prostatectomy specimens previously analyzed by an expert uropathologist. A CNN was constructed to accurately classify the corresponding Gleason. The evaluation was carried out by computing the corresponding 3 classes confusion matrix; thus, calculating the percentage of precision, sensitivity, and specificity, as well as the overall accuracy. Additionally, k-fold three-way cross-validation was performed to enhance evaluation, allowing better interpretation and avoiding possible bias.

Results: The overall accuracy reached 98% for the training and validation stage, and 94% for the test phase. Considering the test samples, the true positive ratio between pathologist and computer method was 85%, 93%, and 96% for specific Gleason patterns. Finally, precision, sensitivity, and specificity reached values up to 97%.

Conclusion: The CNN model presented and evaluated has shown high accuracy for specifically pattern neighbors and critical Gleason patterns. The outcomes are in line and complement others in the literature. The promising results surpassed current inter-pathologist congruence in classical reports, evidencing the potential of this novel technology in daily clinical aspects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
The role of spinal injections towards optimizing patient selection for spinal surgery: A proof-of-concept study in 176 lower back pain patients. Implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist in resource-limited Somalia: a new standard in surgical safety. Association between postoperative complications and hospital length of stay: a large-scale observational study of 4,495,582 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry. Improving surgical technical skills for emergency fixation of unstable pelvic ring fractures: an experimental study using a pelvic ring fracture simulator. Efficacy of a novel oxygen scavenger mask in reducing local oxygen concentrations below the surgical fire risk threshold: an experimental proof-of-concept study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1