深度学习算法在毒性研究中检测肝坏死的实施比较研究。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 TOXICOLOGY
Toxicological Research Pub Date : 2023-04-06 eCollection Date: 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5
Ji-Hee Hwang, Minyoung Lim, Gyeongjin Han, Heejin Park, Yong-Bum Kim, Jinseok Park, Sang-Yeop Jun, Jaeku Lee, Jae-Woo Cho
{"title":"深度学习算法在毒性研究中检测肝坏死的实施比较研究。","authors":"Ji-Hee Hwang,&nbsp;Minyoung Lim,&nbsp;Gyeongjin Han,&nbsp;Heejin Park,&nbsp;Yong-Bum Kim,&nbsp;Jinseok Park,&nbsp;Sang-Yeop Jun,&nbsp;Jaeku Lee,&nbsp;Jae-Woo Cho","doi":"10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Deep learning has recently become one of the most popular methods of image analysis. In non-clinical studies, several tissue slides are generated to investigate the toxicity of a test compound. These are converted into digital image data using a slide scanner, which is then studied by researchers to investigate abnormalities, and the deep learning method has been started to adopt in this study. However, comparative studies evaluating different deep learning algorithms for analyzing abnormal lesions are scarce. In this study, we applied three algorithms, SSD, Mask R-CNN, and DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup>, to detect hepatic necrosis in slide images and determine the best deep learning algorithm for analyzing abnormal lesions. We trained each algorithm on 5750 images and 5835 annotations of hepatic necrosis including validation and test, augmented with 500 image tiles of 448 × 448 pixels. Precision, recall, and accuracy were calculated for each algorithm based on the prediction results of 60 test images of 2688 × 2688 pixels. The two segmentation algorithms, DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup> and Mask R-CNN, showed over 90% of accuracy (0.94 and 0.92, respectively), whereas SSD, an object detection algorithm, showed lower accuracy. The trained DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup> outperformed all others in recall while also successfully separating hepatic necrosis from other features in the test images. It is important to localize and separate the abnormal lesion of interest from other features to investigate it on a slide level. Therefore, we suggest that segmentation algorithms are more appropriate than object detection algorithms for use in the pathological analysis of images in non-clinical studies.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5.</p>","PeriodicalId":23181,"journal":{"name":"Toxicological Research","volume":"39 3","pages":"399-408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313597/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study on the implementation of deep learning algorithms for detection of hepatic necrosis in toxicity studies.\",\"authors\":\"Ji-Hee Hwang,&nbsp;Minyoung Lim,&nbsp;Gyeongjin Han,&nbsp;Heejin Park,&nbsp;Yong-Bum Kim,&nbsp;Jinseok Park,&nbsp;Sang-Yeop Jun,&nbsp;Jaeku Lee,&nbsp;Jae-Woo Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Deep learning has recently become one of the most popular methods of image analysis. In non-clinical studies, several tissue slides are generated to investigate the toxicity of a test compound. These are converted into digital image data using a slide scanner, which is then studied by researchers to investigate abnormalities, and the deep learning method has been started to adopt in this study. However, comparative studies evaluating different deep learning algorithms for analyzing abnormal lesions are scarce. In this study, we applied three algorithms, SSD, Mask R-CNN, and DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup>, to detect hepatic necrosis in slide images and determine the best deep learning algorithm for analyzing abnormal lesions. We trained each algorithm on 5750 images and 5835 annotations of hepatic necrosis including validation and test, augmented with 500 image tiles of 448 × 448 pixels. Precision, recall, and accuracy were calculated for each algorithm based on the prediction results of 60 test images of 2688 × 2688 pixels. The two segmentation algorithms, DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup> and Mask R-CNN, showed over 90% of accuracy (0.94 and 0.92, respectively), whereas SSD, an object detection algorithm, showed lower accuracy. The trained DeepLabV3<sup>+</sup> outperformed all others in recall while also successfully separating hepatic necrosis from other features in the test images. It is important to localize and separate the abnormal lesion of interest from other features to investigate it on a slide level. Therefore, we suggest that segmentation algorithms are more appropriate than object detection algorithms for use in the pathological analysis of images in non-clinical studies.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23181,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicological Research\",\"volume\":\"39 3\",\"pages\":\"399-408\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313597/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicological Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicological Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

深度学习最近已成为最流行的图像分析方法之一。在非临床研究中,生成几张组织切片来研究受试化合物的毒性。使用幻灯片扫描仪将这些数据转换为数字图像数据,然后由研究人员进行研究以调查异常情况,深度学习方法已开始在本研究中采用。然而,评估用于分析异常病变的不同深度学习算法的比较研究很少。在本研究中,我们应用SSD、Mask R-CNN和DeepLabV3+三种算法来检测载玻片图像中的肝坏死,并确定分析异常病变的最佳深度学习算法。我们在5750张肝脏坏死图像和5835条注释上训练了每种算法,包括验证和测试,并增加了500张448 × 448像素。基于2688张60张测试图像的预测结果,计算了每种算法的精确度、召回率和准确性 × 2688像素。DeepLabV3+和Mask R-CNN这两种分割算法的准确率超过90%(分别为0.94和0.92),而SSD(一种目标检测算法)的准确率较低。经过训练的DeepLabV3+在回忆方面优于所有其他产品,同时也成功地将肝坏死与测试图像中的其他特征分离开来。重要的是定位感兴趣的异常病变并将其与其他特征分离,以便在幻灯片水平上对其进行研究。因此,我们建议分割算法比对象检测算法更适合用于非临床研究中的图像病理分析。补充信息:在线版本包含补充材料,请访问10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A comparative study on the implementation of deep learning algorithms for detection of hepatic necrosis in toxicity studies.

A comparative study on the implementation of deep learning algorithms for detection of hepatic necrosis in toxicity studies.

A comparative study on the implementation of deep learning algorithms for detection of hepatic necrosis in toxicity studies.

A comparative study on the implementation of deep learning algorithms for detection of hepatic necrosis in toxicity studies.

Deep learning has recently become one of the most popular methods of image analysis. In non-clinical studies, several tissue slides are generated to investigate the toxicity of a test compound. These are converted into digital image data using a slide scanner, which is then studied by researchers to investigate abnormalities, and the deep learning method has been started to adopt in this study. However, comparative studies evaluating different deep learning algorithms for analyzing abnormal lesions are scarce. In this study, we applied three algorithms, SSD, Mask R-CNN, and DeepLabV3+, to detect hepatic necrosis in slide images and determine the best deep learning algorithm for analyzing abnormal lesions. We trained each algorithm on 5750 images and 5835 annotations of hepatic necrosis including validation and test, augmented with 500 image tiles of 448 × 448 pixels. Precision, recall, and accuracy were calculated for each algorithm based on the prediction results of 60 test images of 2688 × 2688 pixels. The two segmentation algorithms, DeepLabV3+ and Mask R-CNN, showed over 90% of accuracy (0.94 and 0.92, respectively), whereas SSD, an object detection algorithm, showed lower accuracy. The trained DeepLabV3+ outperformed all others in recall while also successfully separating hepatic necrosis from other features in the test images. It is important to localize and separate the abnormal lesion of interest from other features to investigate it on a slide level. Therefore, we suggest that segmentation algorithms are more appropriate than object detection algorithms for use in the pathological analysis of images in non-clinical studies.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43188-023-00173-5.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Toxicological Research is the official journal of the Korean Society of Toxicology. The journal covers all areas of Toxicological Research of chemicals, drugs and environmental agents affecting human and animals, which in turn impact public health. The journal’s mission is to disseminate scientific and technical information on diverse areas of toxicological research. Contributions by toxicologists, molecular biologists, geneticists, biochemists, pharmacologists, clinical researchers and epidemiologists with a global view on public health through toxicological research are welcome. Emphasis will be given to articles providing an understanding of the toxicological mechanisms affecting animal, human and public health. In the case of research articles using natural extracts, detailed information with respect to the origin, extraction method, chemical profiles, and characterization of standard compounds to ensure the reproducible pharmacological activity should be provided.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信