Convolutional Neural Network–Based Automatic Classification of Colorectal and Prostate Tumor Biopsies Using Multispectral Imagery: System Development Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal and prostate cancers are the most common types of cancer in men worldwide. To diagnose colorectal and prostate cancer, a pathologist performs a histological analysis on needle biopsy samples. This manual process is time-consuming and error-prone, resulting in high intra- and interobserver variability, which affects diagnosis reliability. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop an automatic computerized system for diagnosing colorectal and prostate tumors by using images of biopsy samples to reduce time and diagnosis error rates associated with human analysis. METHODS: In this study, we proposed a convolutional neural network (CNN) model for classifying colorectal and prostate tumors from multispectral images of biopsy samples. The key idea was to remove the last block of the convolutional layers and halve the number of filters per layer. RESULTS: Our results showed excellent performance, with an average test accuracy of 99.8% and 99.5% for the prostate and colorectal data sets, respectively. The system showed excellent performance when compared with pretrained CNNs and other classification methods, as it avoids the preprocessing phase while using a single CNN model for the whole classification task. Overall, the proposed CNN architecture was globally the best-performing system for classifying colorectal and prostate tumor images. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed CNN architecture was detailed and compared with previously trained network models used as feature extractors. These CNNs were also compared with other classification techniques. As opposed to pretrained CNNs and other classification approaches, the proposed CNN yielded excellent results. The computational complexity of the CNNs was also investigated, and it was shown that the proposed CNN is better at classifying images than pretrained networks because it does not require preprocessing. Thus, the overall analysis was that the proposed CNN architecture was globally the best-performing system for classifying colorectal and prostate tumor images.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".