Search

Context: Previous studies showed that the agreement among pathologists in recognition of mitoses in breast slides is fairly modest. Aims: Determining the significantly different quantitative features among easily identifiable mitoses, challenging mitoses, and miscounted nonmitoses within breast slides and identifying which color spaces capture the difference among groups better than others. Materials and Methods: The dataset contained 453 mitoses and 265 miscounted objects in breast slides. The mitoses were grouped into three categories based on the confidence degree of three pathologists who annotated them. The mitoses annotated as "probably a mitosis" by the majority of pathologists were considered as the challenging category. The miscounted objects were recognized as a mitosis or probably a mitosis by only one of the pathologists. The mitoses were segmented using k-means clustering, followed by morphological operations. Morphological, intensity-based, and textural features were extracted from the segmented area and also the image patch of 63 × 63 pixels in different channels of eight color spaces. Holistic features describing the mitoses' surrounding cells of each image were also extracted. Statistical Analysis Used: The Kruskal-Wallis H-test followed by the Tukey-Kramer test was used to identify significantly different features. Results: The results indicated that challenging mitoses were smaller and rounder compared to other mitoses. Among different features, the Gabor textural features differed more than others between challenging mitoses and the easily identifiable ones. Sizes of the non-mitoses were similar to easily identifiable mitoses, but nonmitoses were rounder. The intensity-based features from chromatin channels were the most discriminative features between the easily identifiable mitoses and the miscounted objects. Conclusions: Quantitative features can be used to describe the characteristics of challenging mitoses and miscounted nonmitotic objects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Human Protein Atlas (HPA) is an effort to map the location of all human proteins (http://www.proteinatlas.org/). It contains a large number of histological images of sections from human tissue. Tissue micro arrays (TMA) are imaged by a slide scanning microscope, and each image represents a thin slice of a tissue core with a dark brown antibody specific stain and a blue counter stain. When generating antibodies for protein profiling of the human proteome, an important step in the quality control is to compare staining patterns of different antibodies directed towards the same protein. This comparison is an ultimate control that the antibody recognizes the right protein. In this paper, we propose and evaluate different approaches for classifying sub cellular antibody staining patterns in breast tissue samples. Materials and Methods: The proposed methods include the computation of various features including gray level co occurrence matrix (GLCM) features, complex wavelet co occurrence matrix (CWCM) features, and weighted neighbor distance using compound hierarchy of algorithms representing morphology (WND CHARM) inspired features. The extracted features are used into two different multivariate classifiers (support vector machine (SVM) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) classifier). Before extracting features, we use color deconvolution to separate different tissue components, such as the brownly stained positive regions and the blue cellular regions, in the immuno stained TMA images of breast tissue. Results: We present classification results based on combinations of feature measurements. The proposed complex wavelet features and the WND CHARM features have accuracy similar to that of a human expert. Conclusions: Both human experts and the proposed automated methods have difficulties discriminating between nuclear and cytoplasmic staining patterns. This is to a large extent due to mixed staining of nucleus and cytoplasm. Methods for quantification of staining patterns in histopathology have many applications, ranging from antibody quality control to tumor grading. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]