@inproceedings{AubrevilleBertramKlopfleischetal.2018, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {SlideRunner}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2018: Algorithmen - Systeme - Anwendungen}, subtitle = {a tool for massive cell annotations in whole slide images}, publisher = {Springer Vieweg}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-662-56537-7}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56537-7_81}, pages = {309 -- 314}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Large-scale image data such as digital whole-slide histology images pose a challenging task at annotation software solutions. Today, a number of good solutions with varying scopes exist. For cell annotation, however, we find that many do not match the prerequisites for fast annotations. Especially in the field of mitosis detection, it is assumed that detection accuracy could significantly benefit from larger annotation databases that are currently however very troublesome to produce. Further, multiple independent (blind) expert labels are a big asset for such databases, yet there is currently no tool for this kind of annotation available. To ease this tedious process of expert annotation and grading, we introduce SlideRunner, an open source annotation and visualization tool for digital histopathology, developed in close cooperation with two pathologists. SlideRunner is capable of setting annotations like object centers (for e.g. cells) as well as object boundaries (e.g. for tumor outlines). It provides single-click annotations as well as a blind mode for multi-annotations, where the expert is directly shown the microscopy image containing the cells that he has not yet rated.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{MarzahlBertramAubrevilleetal.2020, author = {Marzahl, Christian and Bertram, Christof and Aubreville, Marc and Petrick, Anne and Weiler, Kristina and Gl{\"a}sel, Agnes C. and Fragoso-Garcia, Marco and Merz, Sophie and Bartenschlager, Florian and Hoppe, Judith and Langenhagen, Alina and Jasensky, Anne-Katherine and Voigt, J{\"o}rn and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Are Fast Labeling Methods Reliable? A Case Study of Computer-Aided Expert Annotations on Microscopy Slides}, booktitle = {Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention - MICCAI 2020}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-59710-8}, issn = {1611-3349}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59710-8_3}, pages = {24 -- 32}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{BertramVetaMarzahletal.2020, author = {Bertram, Christof and Veta, Mitko and Marzahl, Christian and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Maier, Andreas and Klopfleisch, Robert and Aubreville, Marc}, title = {Are Pathologist-Defined Labels Reproducible? Comparison of the TUPAC16 Mitotic Figure Dataset with an Alternative Set of Labels}, booktitle = {Interpretable and Annotation-Efficient Learning for Medical Image Computing}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-61166-8}, issn = {1611-3349}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61166-8_22}, pages = {204 -- 213}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KrappmannAubrevilleMaieretal.2018, author = {Krappmann, Maximilian and Aubreville, Marc and Maier, Andreas and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert}, title = {Classification of Mitotic Cells}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2018}, subtitle = {Potentials Beyond the Limits of Small Data Sets}, editor = {Maier, Andreas and Deserno, Thomas Martin and Handels, Heinz and Maier-Hein, Klaus H. and Palm, Christoph and Tolxdorff, Thomas}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-662-56536-0}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56537-7_66}, pages = {245 -- 250}, year = {2018}, language = {en} } @unpublished{AubrevilleKrappmannBertrametal.2017, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Krappmann, Maximilian and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {A Guided Spatial Transformer Network for Histology Cell Differentiation}, publisher = {arXiv}, address = {Ithaca}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1707.08525}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @article{HaghoferFuchsBaumgartingerLipniketal.2023, author = {Haghofer, Andreas and Fuchs-Baumgartinger, Andrea and Lipnik, Karoline and Klopfleisch, Robert and Aubreville, Marc and Scharinger, Josef and Weissenb{\"o}ck, Herbert and Winkler, Stephan M. and Bertram, Christof}, title = {Histological classification of canine and feline lymphoma using a modular approach based on deep learning and advanced image processing}, volume = {13}, pages = {19436}, journal = {Scientific Reports}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {London}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46607-w}, year = {2023}, abstract = {AbstractHistopathological examination of tissue samples is essential for identifying tumor malignancy and the diagnosis of different types of tumor. In the case of lymphoma classification, nuclear size of the neoplastic lymphocytes is one of the key features to differentiate the different subtypes. Based on the combination of artificial intelligence and advanced image processing, we provide a workflow for the classification of lymphoma with regards to their nuclear size (small, intermediate, and large). As the baseline for our workflow testing, we use a Unet++ model trained on histological images of canine lymphoma with individually labeled nuclei. As an alternative to the Unet++, we also used a publicly available pre-trained and unmodified instance segmentation model called Stardist to demonstrate that our modular classification workflow can be combined with different types of segmentation models if they can provide proper nuclei segmentation. Subsequent to nuclear segmentation, we optimize algorithmic parameters for accurate classification of nuclear size using a newly derived reference size and final image classification based on a pathologists-derived ground truth. Our image classification module achieves a classification accuracy of up to 92\% on canine lymphoma data. Compared to the accuracy ranging from 66.67 to 84\% achieved using measurements provided by three individual pathologists, our algorithm provides a higher accuracy level and reproducible results. Our workflow also demonstrates a high transferability to feline lymphoma, as shown by its accuracy of up to 84.21\%, even though our workflow was not optimized for feline lymphoma images. By determining the nuclear size distribution in tumor areas, our workflow can assist pathologists in subtyping lymphoma based on the nuclei size and potentially improve reproducibility. Our proposed approach is modular and comprehensible, thus allowing adaptation for specific tasks and increasing the users' trust in computer-assisted image classification.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{GanzLipnikAmmelingetal.2023, author = {Ganz, Jonathan and Lipnik, Karoline and Ammeling, Jonas and Richter, Barbara and Puget, Chlo{\´e} and Parlak, Eda and Diehl, Laura and Klopfleisch, Robert and Donovan, Taryn and Kiupel, Matti and Bertram, Christof and Breininger, Katharina and Aubreville, Marc}, title = {Deep Learning-based Automatic Assessment of AgNOR-scores in Histopathology Images}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2023: Proceedings, German Workshop on Medical Image Computing, Braunschweig, July 2-4, 2023}, editor = {Deserno, Thomas Martin and Handels, Heinz and Maier, Andreas and Maier-Hein, Klaus H. and Palm, Christoph and Tolxdorff, Thomas}, publisher = {Springer Vieweg}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-41657-7}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-41657-7_49}, pages = {226 -- 231}, year = {2023}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{WilmFragosoGarciaBertrametal.2023, author = {Wilm, Frauke and Fragoso-Garcia, Marco and Bertram, Christof and Stathonikos, Nikolas and {\"O}ttl, Mathias and Qiu, Jingna and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas and Aubreville, Marc and Breininger, Katharina}, title = {Mind the Gap: Scanner-Induced Domain Shifts Pose Challenges for Representation Learning in Histopathology}, booktitle = {2023 IEEE 20th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)}, publisher = {IEEE}, address = {Piscataway}, isbn = {978-1-6654-7358-3}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBI53787.2023.10230458}, year = {2023}, language = {en} } @article{AubrevilleStathonikosDonovanetal.2024, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Donovan, Taryn and Klopfleisch, Robert and Ammeling, Jonas and Ganz, Jonathan and Wilm, Frauke and Veta, Mitko and Jabari, Samir and Eckstein, Markus and Annuscheit, Jonas and Krumnow, Christian and Bozaba, Engin and Cayir, Sercan and Gu, Hongyan and Chen, Xiang and Jahanifar, Mostafa and Shephard, Adam and Kondo, Satoshi and Kasai, Satoshi and Kotte, Sujatha and Saipradeep, Vangala and Lafarge, Maxime W. and Koelzer, Viktor H. and Wang, Ziyue and Zhang, Yongbing and Yang, Sen and Wang, Xiyue and Breininger, Katharina and Bertram, Christof}, title = {Domain generalization across tumor types, laboratories, and species — Insights from the 2022 edition of the Mitosis Domain Generalization Challenge}, volume = {2024}, pages = {103155}, journal = {Medical Image Analysis}, number = {94}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1361-8423}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2024.103155}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Recognition of mitotic figures in histologic tumor specimens is highly relevant to patient outcome assessment. This task is challenging for algorithms and human experts alike, with deterioration of algorithmic performance under shifts in image representations. Considerable covariate shifts occur when assessment is performed on different tumor types, images are acquired using different digitization devices, or specimens are produced in different laboratories. This observation motivated the inception of the 2022 challenge on MItosis Domain Generalization (MIDOG 2022). The challenge provided annotated histologic tumor images from six different domains and evaluated the algorithmic approaches for mitotic figure detection provided by nine challenge participants on ten independent domains. Ground truth for mitotic figure detection was established in two ways: a three-expert majority vote and an independent, immunohistochemistry-assisted set of labels. This work represents an overview of the challenge tasks, the algorithmic strategies employed by the participants, and potential factors contributing to their success. With an score of 0.764 for the top-performing team, we summarize that domain generalization across various tumor domains is possible with today's deep learning-based recognition pipelines. However, we also found that domain characteristics not present in the training set (feline as new species, spindle cell shape as new morphology and a new scanner) led to small but significant decreases in performance. When assessed against the immunohistochemistry-assisted reference standard, all methods resulted in reduced recall scores, with only minor changes in the order of participants in the ranking.}, language = {en} } @article{GanzMarzahlAmmelingetal.2024, author = {Ganz, Jonathan and Marzahl, Christian and Ammeling, Jonas and Rosbach, Emely and Richter, Barbara and Puget, Chlo{\´e} and Denk, Daniela and Demeter, Elena A. and Tabaran, Flaviu A. and Wasinger, Gabriel and Lipnik, Karoline and Tecilla, Marco and Valentine, Matthew J. and Dark, Michael and Abele, Niklas and Bolfa, Pompei and Erber, Ramona and Klopfleisch, Robert and Merz, Sophie and Donovan, Taryn and Jabari, Samir and Bertram, Christof and Breininger, Katharina and Aubreville, Marc}, title = {Information mismatch in PHH3-assisted mitosis annotation leads to interpretation shifts in H\&E slide analysis}, volume = {14}, pages = {26273}, journal = {Scientific Reports}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {London}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-77244-6}, year = {2024}, abstract = {The count of mitotic figures (MFs) observed in hematoxylin and eosin (H\&E)-stained slides is an important prognostic marker, as it is a measure for tumor cell proliferation. However, the identification of MFs has a known low inter-rater agreement. In a computer-aided setting, deep learning algorithms can help to mitigate this, but they require large amounts of annotated data for training and validation. Furthermore, label noise introduced during the annotation process may impede the algorithms' performance. Unlike H\&E, where identification of MFs is based mainly on morphological features, the mitosis-specific antibody phospho-histone H3 (PHH3) specifically highlights MFs. Counting MFs on slides stained against PHH3 leads to higher agreement among raters and has therefore recently been used as a ground truth for the annotation of MFs in H\&E. However, as PHH3 facilitates the recognition of cells indistinguishable from H\&E staining alone, the use of this ground truth could potentially introduce an interpretation shift and even label noise into the H\&E-related dataset, impacting model performance. This study analyzes the impact of PHH3-assisted MF annotation on inter-rater reliability and object level agreement through an extensive multi-rater experiment. Subsequently, MF detectors, including a novel dual-stain detector, were evaluated on the resulting datasets to investigate the influence of PHH3-assisted labeling on the models' performance. We found that the annotators' object-level agreement significantly increased when using PHH3-assisted labeling (F1: 0.53 to 0.74). However, this enhancement in label consistency did not translate to improved performance for H\&E-based detectors, neither during the training phase nor the evaluation phase. Conversely, the dual-stain detector was able to benefit from the higher consistency. This reveals an information mismatch between the H\&E and PHH3-stained images as the cause of this effect, which renders PHH3-assisted annotations not well-aligned for use with H\&E-based detectors. Based on our findings, we propose an improved PHH3-assisted labeling procedure.}, language = {en} } @article{HaghoferParlakBarteletal.2024, author = {Haghofer, Andreas and Parlak, Eda and Bartel, Alexander and Donovan, Taryn and Assenmacher, Charles-Antoine and Bolfa, Pompei and Dark, Michael and Fuchs-Baumgartinger, Andrea and Klang, Andrea and J{\"a}ger, Kathrin and Klopfleisch, Robert and Merz, Sophie and Richter, Barbara and Schulman, F. Yvonne and Janout, Hannah and Ganz, Jonathan and Scharinger, Josef and Aubreville, Marc and Winkler, Stephan M. and Kiupel, Matti and Bertram, Christof}, title = {Nuclear pleomorphism in canine cutaneous mast cell tumors: Comparison of reproducibility and prognostic relevance between estimates, manual morphometry, and algorithmic morphometry}, volume = {62}, journal = {Veterinary Pathology}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {1544-2217}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/03009858241295399}, pages = {161 -- 177}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Variation in nuclear size and shape is an important criterion of malignancy for many tumor types; however, categorical estimates by pathologists have poor reproducibility. Measurements of nuclear characteristics can improve reproducibility, but current manual methods are time-consuming. The aim of this study was to explore the limitations of estimates and develop alternative morphometric solutions for canine cutaneous mast cell tumors (ccMCTs). We assessed the following nuclear evaluation methods for accuracy, reproducibility, and prognostic utility: (1) anisokaryosis estimates by 11 pathologists; (2) gold standard manual morphometry of at least 100 nuclei; (3) practicable manual morphometry with stratified sampling of 12 nuclei by 9 pathologists; and (4) automated morphometry using deep learning-based segmentation. The study included 96 ccMCTs with available outcome information. Inter-rater reproducibility of anisokaryosis estimates was low (k = 0.226), whereas it was good (intraclass correlation = 0.654) for practicable morphometry of the standard deviation (SD) of nuclear size. As compared with gold standard manual morphometry (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.839, 95\% confidence interval [CI] = 0.701-0.977), the prognostic value (tumor-specific survival) of SDs of nuclear area for practicable manual morphometry and automated morphometry were high with an AUC of 0.868 (95\% CI = 0.737-0.991) and 0.943 (95\% CI = 0.889-0.996), respectively. This study supports the use of manual morphometry with stratified sampling of 12 nuclei and algorithmic morphometry to overcome the poor reproducibility of estimates. Further studies are needed to validate our findings, determine inter-algorithmic reproducibility and algorithmic robustness, and explore tumor heterogeneity of nuclear features in entire tumor sections.}, language = {en} }