A deep learning system to diagnose the malignant potential of urothelial carcinoma cells in cytology specimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although deep learning algorithms for clinical cytology have recently been developed, their application to practical assistance systems has not been achieved. In addition, whether deep learning systems (DLSs) can perform diagnoses that cannot be performed by pathologists has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: The authors initially obtained low-power field cytology images from archived Papanicolaou-stained urinary cytology glass slides from 232 patients. To aid in the development of a diagnosis support system that could identify suspicious atypical cells, the images were divided into high-power field panel image sets for training and testing of the 16-layer Visual Geometry Group convolutional neural network. The DLS was trained using linked information pertaining to whether urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the corresponding histology specimen was invasive or noninvasive, or high-grade or low-grade, followed by an evaluation of whether the DLS could diagnose these characteristics. RESULTS: The DLS achieved excellent performance (eg, an area under the curve [AUC] of 0.9890; F1 score, 0.9002) when trained on high-power field images of malignant and benign cases. The DLS could diagnose whether the lesions were invasive UC (AUC, 0.8628; F1 score, 0.8239) or high-grade UC (AUC, 0.8661; F1 score, 0.8218). Gradient-weighted class activation mapping of these images indicated that the diagnoses were based on the color of tumor cell nuclei. CONCLUSIONS: The DLS could accurately screen UC cells and determine the malignant potential of tumors more accurately than classical cytology. The use of a DLS during cytopathology screening could help urologists plan therapeutic strategies, which, in turn, may be beneficial for patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".