Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35896791›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Automated histological classification for digital pathology images of colonoscopy specimen via deep learning.

Sun-Ju Byeon, Jungkap Park, Yoon Ah Cho, Bum-Joo Cho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: from detection to diagnosis.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. AI in Pathology: What could possibly go wrong?Seminars in diagnostic pathology · 2023
    Review
  15. On the Analyses of Medical Images Using Traditional Machine Learning Techniques and Convolutional Neural Networks.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2023
    Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Sun-Ju ByeonDepartment of Pathology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Republic of Korea.
Jungkap ParkMedical Artificial Intelligence Center, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Republic of Korea.
Yoon Ah ChoDepartment of Pathology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea.
Bum-Joo ChoMedical Artificial Intelligence Center, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Republic of Korea. bjcho8@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colonoscopy is an effective tool to detect colorectal lesions and needs the support of pathological diagnosis. This study aimed to develop and validate deep learning models that automatically classify digital pathology images of colon lesions obtained from colonoscopy-related specimen. Histopathological slides of colonoscopic biopsy or resection specimens were collected and grouped into six classes by disease category: adenocarcinoma, tubular adenoma (TA), traditional serrated adenoma (TSA), sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), hyperplastic polyp (HP), and non-specific lesions. Digital photographs were taken of each pathological slide to fine-tune two pre-trained convolutional neural networks, and the model performances were evaluated. A total of 1865 images were included from 703 patients, of which 10% were used as a test dataset. For six-class classification, the mean diagnostic accuracy was 97.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96.0-98.6%) by DenseNet-161 and 95.9% (95% CI 94.1-97.7%) by EfficientNet-B7. The per-class area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was highest for adenocarcinoma (1.000; 95% CI 0.999-1.000) by DenseNet-161 and TSA (1.000; 95% CI 1.000-1.000) by EfficientNet-B7. The lowest per-class AUCs were still excellent: 0.991 (95% CI 0.983-0.999) for HP by DenseNet-161 and 0.995 for SSA (95% CI 0.992-0.998) by EfficientNet-B7. Deep learning models achieved excellent performances for discriminating adenocarcinoma from non-adenocarcinoma lesions with an AUC of 0.995 or 0.998. The pathognomonic area for each class was appropriately highlighted in digital images by saliency map, particularly focusing epithelial lesions. Deep learning models might be a useful tool to help the diagnosis for pathologic slides of colonoscopy-related specimens.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdenomaColonic PolypsColorectal NeoplasmsDeep LearningColonoscopyHumans

Identifiers

PMID35896791
PMCPMC9329279

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.