Pattern Recognition Lab, Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Institute of Veterinary Pathology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 5;10(1):16447. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-73246-2.
Manual count of mitotic figures, which is determined in the tumor region with the highest mitotic activity, is a key parameter of most tumor grading schemes. It can be, however, strongly dependent on the area selection due to uneven mitotic figure distribution in the tumor section. We aimed to assess the question, how significantly the area selection could impact the mitotic count, which has a known high inter-rater disagreement. On a data set of 32 whole slide images of H&E-stained canine cutaneous mast cell tumor, fully annotated for mitotic figures, we asked eight veterinary pathologists (five board-certified, three in training) to select a field of interest for the mitotic count. To assess the potential difference on the mitotic count, we compared the mitotic count of the selected regions to the overall distribution on the slide. Additionally, we evaluated three deep learning-based methods for the assessment of highest mitotic density: In one approach, the model would directly try to predict the mitotic count for the presented image patches as a regression task. The second method aims at deriving a segmentation mask for mitotic figures, which is then used to obtain a mitotic density. Finally, we evaluated a two-stage object-detection pipeline based on state-of-the-art architectures to identify individual mitotic figures. We found that the predictions by all models were, on average, better than those of the experts. The two-stage object detector performed best and outperformed most of the human pathologists on the majority of tumor cases. The correlation between the predicted and the ground truth mitotic count was also best for this approach (0.963-0.979). Further, we found considerable differences in position selection between pathologists, which could partially explain the high variance that has been reported for the manual mitotic count. To achieve better inter-rater agreement, we propose to use a computer-based area selection for support of the pathologist in the manual mitotic count.
有丝分裂计数的手动计数是大多数肿瘤分级方案的关键参数,它是在具有最高有丝分裂活性的肿瘤区域中确定的。然而,由于肿瘤切片中存在有丝分裂计数的不均匀分布,它可能会强烈依赖于区域选择。我们旨在评估由于手动有丝分裂计数的高观察者间差异而导致的区域选择对有丝分裂计数的影响程度。在一个由 32 张 H&E 染色犬皮肤肥大细胞瘤全幻灯片图像组成的数据集上,这些图像完全标注了有丝分裂计数,我们要求八名兽医病理学家(五名委员会认证,三名在培训中)选择一个有丝分裂计数的感兴趣区域。为了评估有丝分裂计数的潜在差异,我们将所选区域的有丝分裂计数与幻灯片上的总体分布进行了比较。此外,我们评估了三种基于深度学习的方法来评估最高有丝分裂密度:在一种方法中,模型将直接尝试预测呈现的图像补丁的有丝分裂计数,作为回归任务。第二种方法旨在为有丝分裂计数生成分割掩模,然后使用该掩模来获得有丝分裂密度。最后,我们评估了一种基于最先进架构的两阶段目标检测管道,以识别单个有丝分裂计数。我们发现,所有模型的预测值平均优于专家的预测值。两阶段目标检测器在大多数肿瘤病例中的表现优于大多数病理学家,并且与ground truth 有丝分裂计数的相关性也最好(0.963-0.979)。此外,我们发现病理学家之间在位置选择上存在相当大的差异,这可以部分解释手动有丝分裂计数报告的高变异性。为了实现更好的观察者间一致性,我们建议使用基于计算机的区域选择来支持病理学家进行手动有丝分裂计数。