Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33850222›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A review and comparison of breast tumor cell nuclei segmentation performances using deep convolutional neural networks.

Andrew Lagree, Majidreza Mohebpour, Nicholas Meti, Khadijeh Saednia, Fang-I Lu, Elzbieta Slodkowska, Sonal Gandhi, Eileen Rakovitch, Alex Shenfield, Ali Sadeghi-Naini and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Automatic identification of pavement cracks in public roads using an optimized deep convolutional neural network model.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Andrew LagreeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Majidreza MohebpourBiological Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Nicholas MetiRadiogenomics Laboratory, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Khadijeh SaedniaDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, York University, Toronto, Canada.
Fang-I LuRadiogenomics Laboratory, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Elzbieta SlodkowskaDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Molecular Diagnostics, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Sonal GandhiRadiogenomics Laboratory, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Eileen RakovitchDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Alex ShenfieldDepartment of Engineering and Mathematics, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK.
Ali Sadeghi-NainiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
William T TranDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada. william.tran@sunnybrook.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is currently the second most common cause of cancer-related death in women. Presently, the clinical benchmark in cancer diagnosis is tissue biopsy examination. However, the manual process of histopathological analysis is laborious, time-consuming, and limited by the quality of the specimen and the experience of the pathologist. This study's objective was to determine if deep convolutional neural networks can be trained, with transfer learning, on a set of histopathological images independent of breast tissue to segment tumor nuclei of the breast. Various deep convolutional neural networks were evaluated for the study, including U-Net, Mask R-CNN, and a novel network (GB U-Net). The networks were trained on a set of Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E)-stained images of eight diverse types of tissues. GB U-Net demonstrated superior performance in segmenting sites of invasive diseases (AJI = 0.53, mAP = 0.39 & AJI = 0.54, mAP = 0.38), validated on two hold-out datasets exclusively containing breast tissue images of approximately 7,582 annotated cells. The results of the networks, trained on images independent of breast tissue, demonstrated that tumor nuclei of the breast could be accurately segmented.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCell NucleusNeural Networks, ComputerDeep LearningFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID33850222
PMCPMC8044238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.