@unpublished{AubrevilleStathonikosDonovanetal.2023, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Donovan, Taryn and Klopfleisch, Robert and Ganz, Jonathan and Ammeling, Jonas 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}, publisher = {arXiv}, address = {Ithaca}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.15589}, year = {2023}, 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 consensus 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 F1 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. When assessed against the immunohistochemistry-assisted reference standard, all methods resulted in reduced recall scores, but with only minor changes in the order of participants in the ranking.}, 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} } @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{StathonikosAubrevilledeVriesetal.2024, author = {Stathonikos, Nikolas and Aubreville, Marc and de Vries, Sjoerd and Wilm, Frauke and Bertram, Christof and Veta, Mitko and van Diest, Paul J}, title = {Breast cancer survival prediction using an automated mitosis detection pipeline}, volume = {10}, pages = {e70008}, journal = {The Journal of Pathology: Clinical Research}, number = {6}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Chichester}, issn = {2056-4538}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1002/2056-4538.70008}, year = {2024}, abstract = {AbstractMitotic count (MC) is the most common measure to assess tumor proliferation in breast cancer patients and is highly predictive of patient outcomes. It is, however, subject to inter- and intraobserver variation and reproducibility challenges that may hamper its clinical utility. In past studies, artificial intelligence (AI)-supported MC has been shown to correlate well with traditional MC on glass slides. Considering the potential of AI to improve reproducibility of MC between pathologists, we undertook the next validation step by evaluating the prognostic value of a fully automatic method to detect and count mitoses on whole slide images using a deep learning model. The model was developed in the context of the Mitosis Domain Generalization Challenge 2021 (MIDOG21) grand challenge and was expanded by a novel automatic area selector method to find the optimal mitotic hotspot and calculate the MC per 2 mm2. We employed this method on a breast cancer cohort with long-term follow-up from the University Medical Centre Utrecht (N = 912) and compared predictive values for overall survival of AI-based MC and light-microscopic MC, previously assessed during routine diagnostics. The MIDOG21 model was prognostically comparable to the original MC from the pathology report in uni- and multivariate survival analysis. In conclusion, a fully automated MC AI algorithm was validated in a large cohort of breast cancer with regard to retained prognostic value compared with traditional light-microscopic MC.}, language = {en} } @article{AubrevilleStathonikosBertrametal.2022, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Hoeve, Natalie ter and Ciompi, Francesco and Wilm, Frauke and Marzahl, Christian and Donovan, Taryn and Maier, Andreas and Breen, Jack and Ravikumar, Nishant and Chung, Youjin and Park, Jinah and Nateghi, Ramin and Pourakpour, Fattaneh and Fick, Rutger H. J. and Ben Hadj, Saima and Jahanifar, Mostafa and Shepard, Adam and Dexl, Jakob and Wittenberg, Thomas and Kondo, Satoshi and Lafarge, Maxime W. and Kolezer, Viktor H. and Liang, Jingtang and Wang, Yubo and Long, Xi and Liu, Jingxin and Razavi, Salar and Khademi, April and Yang, Sen and Wang, Xiyue and Erber, Ramona and Klang, Andrea and Lipnik, Karoline and Bolfa, Pompei and Dark, Michael and Wasinger, Gabriel and Veta, Mitko and Breininger, Katharina}, title = {Mitosis domain generalization in histopathology images — The MIDOG challenge}, volume = {2023}, pages = {102699}, journal = {Medical Image Analysis}, number = {84}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1361-8415}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2022.102699}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{AubrevilleBertramStathonikosetal.2021, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Stathonikos, Nikolas and ter Hoeve, Natalie and Ciompi, Francesco and Klopfleisch, Robert and Veta, Mitko and Donovan, Taryn and Marzahl, Christian and Wilm, Frauke and Breininger, Katharina and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Quantifying the Scanner-Induced Domain Gap in Mitosis Detection}, booktitle = {MIDL: Medical Imaging with Deep Learning 2021}, publisher = {MIDL Foundation}, address = {Nijmegen}, url = {https://2021.midl.io/papers/i6}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @article{AubrevilleWilmStathonikosetal.2023, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Wilm, Frauke and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Breininger, Katharina and Donovan, Taryn and Jabari, Samir and Veta, Mitko and Ganz, Jonathan and Ammeling, Jonas and van Diest, Paul J and Klopfleisch, Robert and Bertram, Christof}, title = {A comprehensive multi-domain dataset for mitotic figure detection}, volume = {10}, pages = {484}, journal = {Scientific Data}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {London}, issn = {2052-4463}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02327-4}, year = {2023}, abstract = {The prognostic value of mitotic figures in tumor tissue is well-established for many tumor types and automating this task is of high research interest. However, especially deep learning-based methods face performance deterioration in the presence of domain shifts, which may arise from different tumor types, slide preparation and digitization devices. We introduce the MIDOG++ dataset, an extension of the MIDOG 2021 and 2022 challenge datasets. We provide region of interest images from 503 histological specimens of seven different tumor types with variable morphology with in total labels for 11,937 mitotic figures: breast carcinoma, lung carcinoma, lymphosarcoma, neuroendocrine tumor, cutaneous mast cell tumor, cutaneous melanoma, and (sub)cutaneous soft tissue sarcoma. The specimens were processed in several laboratories utilizing diverse scanners. We evaluated the extent of the domain shift by using state-of-the-art approaches, observing notable differences in single-domain training. In a leave-one-domain-out setting, generalizability improved considerably. This mitotic figure dataset is the first that incorporates a wide domain shift based on different tumor types, laboratories, whole slide image scanners, and species.}, language = {en} } @unpublished{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}, publisher = {arXiv}, address = {Ithaca}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2007.05351}, year = {2020}, language = {en} }