Deep Learning-Based Classification of Cancer Cell in Leptomeningeal Metastasis on Cytomorphologic Features of Cerebrospinal Fluid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: It is a critical challenge to diagnose leptomeningeal metastasis (LM), given its technical difficulty and the lack of typical symptoms. The existing gold standard of diagnosing LM is to use positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cytology, which consumes significantly more time to classify cells under a microscope. Objective: This study aims to establish a deep learning model to classify cancer cells in CSF, thus facilitating doctors to achieve an accurate and fast diagnosis of LM in an early stage. Method: The cerebrospinal fluid laboratory of Xijing Hospital provides 53,255 cells from 90 LM patients in the research. We used two deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) models to classify cells in the CSF. A five-way cell classification model (CNN1) consists of lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, erythrocytes, and cancer cells. A four-way cancer cell classification model (CNN2) consists of lung cancer cells, gastric cancer cells, breast cancer cells, and pancreatic cancer cells. Here, the CNN models were constructed by Resnet-inception-V2. We evaluated the performance of the proposed models on two external datasets and compared them with the results from 42 doctors of various levels of experience in the human-machine tests. Furthermore, we develop a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) software to generate cytology diagnosis reports in the research rapidly. Results: With respect to the validation set, the mean average precision (mAP) of CNN1 is over 95% and that of CNN2 is close to 80%. Hence, the proposed deep learning model effectively classifies cells in CSF to facilitate the screening of cancer cells. In the human-machine tests, the accuracy of CNN1 is similar to the results from experts, with higher accuracy than doctors in other levels. Moreover, the overall accuracy of CNN2 is 10% higher than that of experts, with a time consumption of only one-third of that consumed by an expert. Using the CAD software saves 90% working time of cytologists. Conclusion: A deep learning method has been developed to assist the LM diagnosis with high accuracy and low time consumption effectively. Thanks to labeled data and step-by-step training, our proposed method can successfully classify cancer cells in the CSF to assist LM diagnosis early. In addition, this unique research can predict cancer's primary source of LM, which relies on cytomorphologic features without immunohistochemistry. Our results show that deep learning can be widely used in medical images to classify cerebrospinal fluid cells. For complex cancer classification tasks, the accuracy of the proposed method is significantly higher than that of specialist doctors, and its performance is better than that of junior doctors and interns. The application of CNNs and CAD software may ultimately aid in expediting the diagnosis and overcoming the shortage of experienced cytologists, thereby facilitating earlier treatment and improving the prognosis of LM.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".