Florian Bartenschlager

CV
4papers
61citations
Novelty48%
AI Score25

4 Papers

CVJan 5, 2021Code
Dataset on Bi- and Multi-Nucleated Tumor Cells in Canine Cutaneous Mast Cell Tumors

Christof A. Bertram, Taryn A. Donovan, Marco Tecilla et al.

Tumor cells with two nuclei (binucleated cells, BiNC) or more nuclei (multinucleated cells, MuNC) indicate an increased amount of cellular genetic material which is thought to facilitate oncogenesis, tumor progression and treatment resistance. In canine cutaneous mast cell tumors (ccMCT), binucleation and multinucleation are parameters used in cytologic and histologic grading schemes (respectively) which correlate with poor patient outcome. For this study, we created the first open source data-set with 19,983 annotations of BiNC and 1,416 annotations of MuNC in 32 histological whole slide images of ccMCT. Labels were created by a pathologist and an algorithmic-aided labeling approach with expert review of each generated candidate. A state-of-the-art deep learning-based model yielded an $F_1$ score of 0.675 for BiNC and 0.623 for MuNC on 11 test whole slide images. In regions of interest ($2.37 mm^2$) extracted from these test images, 6 pathologists had an object detection performance between 0.270 - 0.526 for BiNC and 0.316 - 0.622 for MuNC, while our model archived an $F_1$ score of 0.667 for BiNC and 0.685 for MuNC. This open dataset can facilitate development of automated image analysis for this task and may thereby help to promote standardization of this facet of histologic tumor prognostication.

HCApr 13, 2020
Are fast labeling methods reliable? A case study of computer-aided expert annotations on microscopy slides

Christian Marzahl, Christof A. Bertram, Marc Aubreville et al.

Deep-learning-based pipelines have shown the potential to revolutionalize microscopy image diagnostics by providing visual augmentations to a trained pathology expert. However, to match human performance, the methods rely on the availability of vast amounts of high-quality labeled data, which poses a significant challenge. To circumvent this, augmented labeling methods, also known as expert-algorithm-collaboration, have recently become popular. However, potential biases introduced by this operation mode and their effects for training neuronal networks are not entirely understood. This work aims to shed light on some of the effects by providing a case study for three pathologically relevant diagnostic settings. Ten trained pathology experts performed a labeling tasks first without and later with computer-generated augmentation. To investigate different biasing effects, we intentionally introduced errors to the augmentation. Furthermore, we developed a novel loss function which incorporates the experts' annotation consensus in the training of a deep learning classifier. In total, the pathology experts annotated 26,015 cells on 1,200 images in this novel annotation study. Backed by this extensive data set, we found that the consensus of multiple experts and the deep learning classifier accuracy, was significantly increased in the computer-aided setting, versus the unaided annotation. However, a significant percentage of the deliberately introduced false labels was not identified by the experts. Additionally, we showed that our loss function profited from multiple experts and outperformed conventional loss functions. At the same time, systematic errors did not lead to a deterioration of the trained classifier accuracy. Furthermore, a classifier trained with annotations from a single expert with computer-aided support can outperform the combined annotations from up to nine experts.

IVAug 12, 2019
Deep Learning-Based Quantification of Pulmonary Hemosiderophages in Cytology Slides

Christian Marzahl, Marc Aubreville, Christof A. Bertram et al.

Purpose: Exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) is a common syndrome in sport horses with negative impact on performance. Cytology of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid by use of a scoring system is considered the most sensitive diagnostic method. Macrophages are classified depending on the degree of cytoplasmic hemosiderin content. The current gold standard is manual grading, which is however monotonous and time-consuming. Methods: We evaluated state-of-the-art deep learning-based methods for single cell macrophage classification and compared them against the performance of nine cytology experts and evaluated inter- and intra-observer variability. Additionally, we evaluated object detection methods on a novel data set of 17 completely annotated cytology whole slide images (WSI) containing 78,047 hemosiderophages. Resultsf: Our deep learning-based approach reached a concordance of 0.85, partially exceeding human expert concordance (0.68 to 0.86, $μ$=0.73, $σ$ =0.04). Intra-observer variability was high (0.68 to 0.88) and inter-observer concordance was moderate (Fleiss kappa = 0.67). Our object detection approach has a mean average precision of 0.66 over the five classes from the whole slide gigapixel image and a computation time of below two minutes. Conclusion: To mitigate the high inter- and intra-rater variability, we propose our automated object detection pipeline, enabling accurate, reproducible and quick EIPH scoring in WSI.

CVFeb 12, 2019
Deep learning algorithms out-perform veterinary pathologists in detecting the mitotically most active tumor region

Marc Aubreville, Christof A. Bertram, Christian Marzahl et al.

Manual count of mitotic figures, which is determined in the tumor region with the highest mitotic activity, is a key parameter of most tumor grading schemes. It can be, however, strongly dependent on the area selection due to uneven mitotic figure distribution in the tumor section.We aimed to assess the question, how significantly the area selection could impact the mitotic count, which has a known high inter-rater disagreement. On a data set of 32 whole slide images of H&E-stained canine cutaneous mast cell tumor, fully annotated for mitotic figures, we asked eight veterinary pathologists (five board-certified, three in training) to select a field of interest for the mitotic count. To assess the potential difference on the mitotic count, we compared the mitotic count of the selected regions to the overall distribution on the slide.Additionally, we evaluated three deep learning-based methods for the assessment of highest mitotic density: In one approach, the model would directly try to predict the mitotic count for the presented image patches as a regression task. The second method aims at deriving a segmentation mask for mitotic figures, which is then used to obtain a mitotic density. Finally, we evaluated a two-stage object-detection pipeline based on state-of-the-art architectures to identify individual mitotic figures. We found that the predictions by all models were, on average, better than those of the experts. The two-stage object detector performed best and outperformed most of the human pathologists on the majority of tumor cases. The correlation between the predicted and the ground truth mitotic count was also best for this approach (0.963 to 0.979). Further, we found considerable differences in position selection between pathologists, which could partially explain the high variance that has been reported for the manual mitotic count.