Author
Vitali Liauchuk
Bio: Vitali Liauchuk is an academic researcher from National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. The author has contributed to research in topics: Tuberculosis & Question answering. The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 24 publications receiving 1848 citations.
Papers
More filters
••
Radboud University Nijmegen1, Eindhoven University of Technology2, Utrecht University3, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology5, Harvard University6, The Chinese University of Hong Kong7, Munich Business School8, Middle East Technical University9, University of Toronto10, University of Warwick11, Coventry Health Care12, Qatar University13, HTW Berlin - University of Applied Sciences14, Tampere University of Technology15, University of Tampere16, Technische Universität München17, Osaka University18, University of South Florida19, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus20, University of Castilla–La Mancha21, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University22, Pontifical Catholic University of Peru23
TL;DR: In the setting of a challenge competition, some deep learning algorithms achieved better diagnostic performance than a panel of 11 pathologists participating in a simulation exercise designed to mimic routine pathology workflow; algorithm performance was comparable with an expert pathologist interpreting whole-slide images without time constraints.
Abstract: Importance Application of deep learning algorithms to whole-slide pathology images can potentially improve diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. Objective Assess the performance of automated deep learning algorithms at detecting metastases in hematoxylin and eosin–stained tissue sections of lymph nodes of women with breast cancer and compare it with pathologists’ diagnoses in a diagnostic setting. Design, Setting, and Participants Researcher challenge competition (CAMELYON16) to develop automated solutions for detecting lymph node metastases (November 2015-November 2016). A training data set of whole-slide images from 2 centers in the Netherlands with (n = 110) and without (n = 160) nodal metastases verified by immunohistochemical staining were provided to challenge participants to build algorithms. Algorithm performance was evaluated in an independent test set of 129 whole-slide images (49 with and 80 without metastases). The same test set of corresponding glass slides was also evaluated by a panel of 11 pathologists with time constraint (WTC) from the Netherlands to ascertain likelihood of nodal metastases for each slide in a flexible 2-hour session, simulating routine pathology workflow, and by 1 pathologist without time constraint (WOTC). Exposures Deep learning algorithms submitted as part of a challenge competition or pathologist interpretation. Main Outcomes and Measures The presence of specific metastatic foci and the absence vs presence of lymph node metastasis in a slide or image using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The 11 pathologists participating in the simulation exercise rated their diagnostic confidence as definitely normal, probably normal, equivocal, probably tumor, or definitely tumor. Results The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the algorithms ranged from 0.556 to 0.994. The top-performing algorithm achieved a lesion-level, true-positive fraction comparable with that of the pathologist WOTC (72.4% [95% CI, 64.3%-80.4%]) at a mean of 0.0125 false-positives per normal whole-slide image. For the whole-slide image classification task, the best algorithm (AUC, 0.994 [95% CI, 0.983-0.999]) performed significantly better than the pathologists WTC in a diagnostic simulation (mean AUC, 0.810 [range, 0.738-0.884];P Conclusions and Relevance In the setting of a challenge competition, some deep learning algorithms achieved better diagnostic performance than a panel of 11 pathologists participating in a simulation exercise designed to mimic routine pathology workflow; algorithm performance was comparable with an expert pathologist interpreting whole-slide images without time constraints. Whether this approach has clinical utility will require evaluation in a clinical setting.
2,116 citations
••
TL;DR: The achieved results are promising given the difficulty of the tasks and weakly‐labeled nature of the ground truth, however, further research is needed to improve the practical utility of image analysis methods for this task.
194 citations
••
11 Sep 2017
TL;DR: An overview of the ImageCLEF 2017 evaluation campaign, an event that was organized as part of the CLEF (Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum) labs 2017, shows the interest in this benchmarking campaign despite the fact that all four tasks were new and had to create their own community.
Abstract: This paper presents an overview of the ImageCLEF 2017 evaluation campaign, an event that was organized as part of the CLEF (Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum) labs 2017. ImageCLEF is an ongoing initiative (started in 2003) that promotes the evaluation of technologies for annotation, indexing and retrieval for providing information access to collections of images in various usage scenarios and domains. In 2017, the 15th edition of ImageCLEF, three main tasks were proposed and one pilot task: (1) a LifeLog task about searching in LifeLog data, so videos, images and other sources; (2) a caption prediction task that aims at predicting the caption of a figure from the biomedical literature based on the figure alone; (3) a tuberculosis task that aims at detecting the tuberculosis type from CT (Computed Tomography) volumes of the lung and also the drug resistance of the tuberculosis; and (4) a remote sensing pilot task that aims at predicting population density based on satellite images. The strong participation of over 150 research groups registering for the four tasks and 27 groups submitting results shows the interest in this benchmarking campaign despite the fact that all four tasks were new and had to create their own community.
72 citations
••
10 Sep 2018
TL;DR: An overview of the ImageCLEF 2018 evaluation campaign is presented, with over 100 research groups registering and 31 submitting results for the tasks, shows an increasing interest in this benchmarking campaign.
Abstract: This paper presents an overview of the ImageCLEF 2018 evaluation campaign, an event that was organized as part of the CLEF (Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum) Labs 2018. ImageCLEF is an ongoing initiative (it started in 2003) that promotes the evaluation of technologies for annotation, indexing and retrieval with the aim of providing information access to collections of images in various usage scenarios and domains. In 2018, the 16th edition of ImageCLEF ran three main tasks and a pilot task: (1) a caption prediction task that aims at predicting the caption of a figure from the biomedical literature based only on the figure image; (2) a tuberculosis task that aims at detecting the tuberculosis type, severity and drug resistance from CT (Computed Tomography) volumes of the lung; (3) a LifeLog task (videos, images and other sources) about daily activities understanding and moment retrieval, and (4) a pilot task on visual question answering where systems are tasked with answering medical questions. The strong participation, with over 100 research groups registering and 31 submitting results for the tasks, shows an increasing interest in this benchmarking campaign.
69 citations
••
Politehnica University of Bucharest1, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland2, University of La Rochelle3, National Institutes of Health4, Philips5, University of Bergen6, University of Cagliari7, University of Oslo8, Ho Chi Minh City University of Science9, Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt10, Dublin City University11, Dortmund University of Applied Sciences and Arts12, University of Essex13, University of the Aegean14
TL;DR: An overview of the ImageCLEF 2019 lab is presented, organized as part of the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum - CLEF Labs 2019, and shows an important interest in this benchmark campaign.
Abstract: This paper presents an overview of the ImageCLEF 2019 lab, organized as part of the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum - CLEF Labs 2019. ImageCLEF is an ongoing evaluation initiative (started in 2003) that promotes the evaluation of technologies for annotation, indexing and retrieval of visual data with the aim of providing information access to large collections of images in various usage scenarios and domains. In 2019, the 17th edition of ImageCLEF runs four main tasks: (i) a medical task that groups three previous tasks (caption analysis, tuberculosis prediction, and medical visual question answering) with new data, (ii) a lifelog task (videos, images and other sources) about daily activities understanding, retrieval and summarization, (iii) a new security task addressing the problems of automatically identifying forged content and retrieve hidden information, and (iv) a new coral task about segmenting and labeling collections of coral images for 3D modeling. The strong participation, with 235 research groups registering, and 63 submitting over 359 runs, shows an important interest in this benchmark campaign.
67 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
TL;DR: Over time, marked improvements in accuracy, productivity, and workflow will likely be actualized, but whether that will be used to improve the patient–doctor relationship or facilitate its erosion remains to be seen.
Abstract: The use of artificial intelligence, and the deep-learning subtype in particular, has been enabled by the use of labeled big data, along with markedly enhanced computing power and cloud storage, across all sectors. In medicine, this is beginning to have an impact at three levels: for clinicians, predominantly via rapid, accurate image interpretation; for health systems, by improving workflow and the potential for reducing medical errors; and for patients, by enabling them to process their own data to promote health. The current limitations, including bias, privacy and security, and lack of transparency, along with the future directions of these applications will be discussed in this article. Over time, marked improvements in accuracy, productivity, and workflow will likely be actualized, but whether that will be used to improve the patient-doctor relationship or facilitate its erosion remains to be seen.
2,574 citations
••
TL;DR: A perspective on the basic concepts of convolutional neural network and its application to various radiological tasks is offered, and its challenges and future directions in the field of radiology are discussed.
Abstract: Convolutional neural network (CNN), a class of artificial neural networks that has become dominant in various computer vision tasks, is attracting interest across a variety of domains, including radiology. CNN is designed to automatically and adaptively learn spatial hierarchies of features through backpropagation by using multiple building blocks, such as convolution layers, pooling layers, and fully connected layers. This review article offers a perspective on the basic concepts of CNN and its application to various radiological tasks, and discusses its challenges and future directions in the field of radiology. Two challenges in applying CNN to radiological tasks, small dataset and overfitting, will also be covered in this article, as well as techniques to minimize them. Being familiar with the concepts and advantages, as well as limitations, of CNN is essential to leverage its potential in diagnostic radiology, with the goal of augmenting the performance of radiologists and improving patient care. • Convolutional neural network is a class of deep learning methods which has become dominant in various computer vision tasks and is attracting interest across a variety of domains, including radiology.
• Convolutional neural network is composed of multiple building blocks, such as convolution layers, pooling layers, and fully connected layers, and is designed to automatically and adaptively learn spatial hierarchies of features through a backpropagation algorithm.
• Familiarity with the concepts and advantages, as well as limitations, of convolutional neural network is essential to leverage its potential to improve radiologist performance and, eventually, patient care.
2,189 citations
••
TL;DR: Recent breakthroughs in AI technologies and their biomedical applications are outlined, the challenges for further progress in medical AI systems are identified, and the economic, legal and social implications of AI in healthcare are summarized.
Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is gradually changing medical practice. With recent progress in digitized data acquisition, machine learning and computing infrastructure, AI applications are expanding into areas that were previously thought to be only the province of human experts. In this Review Article, we outline recent breakthroughs in AI technologies and their biomedical applications, identify the challenges for further progress in medical AI systems, and summarize the economic, legal and social implications of AI in healthcare.
1,315 citations
••
TL;DR: A multiple instance learning-based deep learning system that uses only the reported diagnoses as labels for training, thereby avoiding expensive and time-consuming pixel-wise manual annotations, and has the ability to train accurate classification models at unprecedented scale.
Abstract: The development of decision support systems for pathology and their deployment in clinical practice have been hindered by the need for large manually annotated datasets. To overcome this problem, we present a multiple instance learning-based deep learning system that uses only the reported diagnoses as labels for training, thereby avoiding expensive and time-consuming pixel-wise manual annotations. We evaluated this framework at scale on a dataset of 44,732 whole slide images from 15,187 patients without any form of data curation. Tests on prostate cancer, basal cell carcinoma and breast cancer metastases to axillary lymph nodes resulted in areas under the curve above 0.98 for all cancer types. Its clinical application would allow pathologists to exclude 65–75% of slides while retaining 100% sensitivity. Our results show that this system has the ability to train accurate classification models at unprecedented scale, laying the foundation for the deployment of computational decision support systems in clinical practice.
1,310 citations
••
01 Oct 2019
TL;DR: A major finding of the review is that few studies presented externally validated results or compared the performance of deep learning models and health-care professionals using the same sample, which limits reliable interpretation of the reported diagnostic accuracy.
Abstract: Summary Background Deep learning offers considerable promise for medical diagnostics. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of deep learning algorithms versus health-care professionals in classifying diseases using medical imaging. Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Ovid-MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index for studies published from Jan 1, 2012, to June 6, 2019. Studies comparing the diagnostic performance of deep learning models and health-care professionals based on medical imaging, for any disease, were included. We excluded studies that used medical waveform data graphics material or investigated the accuracy of image segmentation rather than disease classification. We extracted binary diagnostic accuracy data and constructed contingency tables to derive the outcomes of interest: sensitivity and specificity. Studies undertaking an out-of-sample external validation were included in a meta-analysis, using a unified hierarchical model. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018091176. Findings Our search identified 31 587 studies, of which 82 (describing 147 patient cohorts) were included. 69 studies provided enough data to construct contingency tables, enabling calculation of test accuracy, with sensitivity ranging from 9·7% to 100·0% (mean 79·1%, SD 0·2) and specificity ranging from 38·9% to 100·0% (mean 88·3%, SD 0·1). An out-of-sample external validation was done in 25 studies, of which 14 made the comparison between deep learning models and health-care professionals in the same sample. Comparison of the performance between health-care professionals in these 14 studies, when restricting the analysis to the contingency table for each study reporting the highest accuracy, found a pooled sensitivity of 87·0% (95% CI 83·0–90·2) for deep learning models and 86·4% (79·9–91·0) for health-care professionals, and a pooled specificity of 92·5% (95% CI 85·1–96·4) for deep learning models and 90·5% (80·6–95·7) for health-care professionals. Interpretation Our review found the diagnostic performance of deep learning models to be equivalent to that of health-care professionals. However, a major finding of the review is that few studies presented externally validated results or compared the performance of deep learning models and health-care professionals using the same sample. Additionally, poor reporting is prevalent in deep learning studies, which limits reliable interpretation of the reported diagnostic accuracy. New reporting standards that address specific challenges of deep learning could improve future studies, enabling greater confidence in the results of future evaluations of this promising technology. Funding None.
850 citations