The current practice of histopathology review is limited in speed and accuracy. The current diagnostic paradigm does not fully describe the complex and complicated patterns of cancer. To address these needs, we develop an automated and objective system that facilitates a comprehensive and easy information management and decision-making. We also develop a tissue similarity measure scheme to broaden our understanding of tissue characteristics.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
The system includes a database of previously evaluated prostate tissue images, clinical information and a tissue retrieval process. In the system, a tissue is characterized by its morphology. The retrieval process seeks to find the closest matching cases with the tissue of interest. Moreover, we define 9 morphologic criteria by which a pathologist arrives at a histomorphologic diagnosis. Based on the 9 criteria, true tissue similarity is determined and serves as the gold standard of tissue retrieval. Here, we found a minimum of 4 and 3 matching cases, out of 5, for ~80 % and ~60 % of the queries when a match was defined as the tissue similarity score ≥5 and ≥6, respectively. We were also able to examine the relationship between tissues beyond the Gleason grading system due to the tissue similarity scoring system.
Providing the closest matching cases and their clinical information with pathologists will help to conduct consistent and reliable diagnoses. Thus, we expect the system to facilitate quality maintenance and quality improvement of cancer pathology.
BMC bioinformatics. 2016 Jun 01*** epublish ***
Jin Tae Kwak, Stephen M Hewitt, André Alexander Kajdacsy-Balla, Saurabh Sinha, Rohit Bhargava
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul, 05006, Korea., Tissue Array Research Program, Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20850, USA., Department of Pathology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA., Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2122 Siebel Center, 201 N. Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA. ., Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, Department of Bioengineering, Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and University of Illinois Cancer Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 4265 Beckman Institute 405 N. Mathews Avenue, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA. .