Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39443575›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Leveraging weak complementary labels enhances semantic segmentation of hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Miriam Hägele, Johannes Eschrich, Lukas Ruff, Maximilian Alber, Simon Schallenberg, Adrien Guillot, Christoph Roderburg, Frank Tacke, Frederick Klauschen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
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

9 authors.

Miriam Hägele *Machine learning group, Technische Universität Berlin, 10623, Berlin, Germany. haegele@tu-berlin.de.
Johannes Eschrich *Department of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353, Berlin, Germany. johannes.eschrich@charite.de.
Lukas RuffAignostics GmbH, 10555, Berlin, Germany.
Maximilian AlberAignostics GmbH, 10555, Berlin, Germany.
Simon SchallenbergInstitute of Pathology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Adrien GuillotDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Christoph RoderburgClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Moorenstrasse 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Frank TackeDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Frederick KlauschenBIFOLD - Berlin Institute for the Foundations of Learning and Data, Berlin, Germany. f.klauschen@lmu.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper we present a deep learning segmentation approach to classify and quantify the two most prevalent primary liver cancers - hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma - from hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained whole slide images. While semantic segmentation of medical images typically requires costly pixel-level annotations by domain experts, there often exists additional information which is routinely obtained in clinical diagnostics but rarely utilized for model training. We propose to leverage such weak information from patient diagnoses by deriving complementary labels that indicate to which class a sample cannot belong to. To integrate these labels, we formulate a complementary loss for segmentation. Motivated by the medical application, we demonstrate for general segmentation tasks that including additional patches with solely weak complementary labels during model training can significantly improve the predictive performance and robustness of a model. On the task of diagnostic differentiation between hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, we achieve a balanced accuracy of 0.91 (CI 95%: 0.86-0.95) at case level for 165 hold-out patients. Furthermore, we also show that leveraging complementary labels improves the robustness of segmentation and increases performance at case level.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCarcinoma, HepatocellularCholangiocarcinomaDeep LearningLiver NeoplasmsSemanticsHumansImage Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID39443575
PMCPMC11499859

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.