Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39466503›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2024

An Artificial Intelligent System for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Whole Slide Images.

Sajib Saha, Janardhan Vignarajan, Adam Flesch, Patrik Jelinko, Petra Gorog, Eniko Szep, Csaba Toth, Peter Gombas, Tibor Schvarcz, Orsolya Mihaly and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

16 authors.

Sajib SahaAustralian e-Health Research Centre, CSIRO, Kensington, Australia. Sajib.Saha@csiro.au.
Janardhan VignarajanAustralian e-Health Research Centre, CSIRO, Kensington, Australia.
Adam FleschAI4Path (Prosperitree Pty Ltd), Roseville, Australia.
Patrik JelinkoAI4Path (Prosperitree Pty Ltd), Roseville, Australia.
Petra GorogMarkusovszky University Teaching Hospital, Szombathely, Hungary.
Eniko SzepMarkusovszky University Teaching Hospital, Szombathely, Hungary.
Csaba TothMarkusovszky University Teaching Hospital, Szombathely, Hungary.
Peter GombasSt. Barbara County Hospital, Tatabanya, Hungary.
Tibor SchvarczSt. Barbara County Hospital, Tatabanya, Hungary.
Orsolya MihalySt. Barbara County Hospital, Tatabanya, Hungary.
Marianna KapinJosa Andras Teaching Hospital, Nyiregyhaza, Hungary.
Alexandra ZubJosa Andras Teaching Hospital, Nyiregyhaza, Hungary.
Levente KuthiDepartment of Pathology, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Laszlo TiszlaviczDepartment of Pathology, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Tibor GlaszAI4Path (Prosperitree Pty Ltd), Roseville, Australia.
Shaun FrostAustralian e-Health Research Centre, CSIRO, Kensington, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years a significant demand to develop computer-assisted diagnostic tools to assess prostate cancer using whole slide images has been observed. In this study we develop and validate a machine learning system for cancer assessment, inclusive of detection of perineural invasion and measurement of cancer portion to meet clinical reporting needs. The system analyses the whole slide image in three consecutive stages: tissue detection, classification, and slide level analysis. The whole slide image is divided into smaller regions (patches). The tissue detection stage relies upon traditional machine learning to identify WSI patches containing tissue, which are then further assessed at the classification stage where deep learning algorithms are employed to detect and classify cancer tissue. At the slide level analysis stage, entire slide level information is generated by aggregating all the patch level information of the slide. A total of 2340 haematoxylin and eosin stained slides were used to train and validate the system. A medical team consisting of 11 board certified pathologists with prostatic pathology subspeciality competences working independently in 4 different medical centres performed the annotations. Pixel-level annotation based on an agreed set of 10 annotation terms, determined based on medical relevance and prevalence, was created by the team. The system achieved an accuracy of 99.53% in tissue detection, with sensitivity and specificity respectively of 99.78% and 99.12%. The system achieved an accuracy of 92.80% in classifying tissue terms, with sensitivity and specificity respectively 92.61% and 99.25%, when 5x magnification level was used. For 10x magnification, these values were respectively 91.04%, 90.49%, and 99.07%. For 20x magnification they were 84.71%, 83.95%, 90.13%.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceDeep LearningDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningMaleSensitivity and SpecificityCancer detectionCNNComputer-assisted diagnosisConvolutional neural networkDeep learningProstate cancerWhole slide imagingWSI

Identifiers

PMID39466503
PMCPMC11519157

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.