Deep learning assessment of breast terminal duct lobular unit involution: Towards automated prediction of breast cancer risk.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
14
11
2019
accepted:
27
03
2020
entrez:
16
4
2020
pubmed:
16
4
2020
medline:
16
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) involution is the regression of milk-producing structures in the breast. Women with less TDLU involution are more likely to develop breast cancer. A major bottleneck in studying TDLU involution in large cohort studies is the need for labor-intensive manual assessment of TDLUs. We developed a computational pathology solution to automatically capture TDLU involution measures. Whole slide images (WSIs) of benign breast biopsies were obtained from the Nurses' Health Study. A set of 92 WSIs was annotated for acini, TDLUs and adipose tissue to train deep convolutional neural network (CNN) models for detection of acini, and segmentation of TDLUs and adipose tissue. These networks were integrated into a single computational method to capture TDLU involution measures including number of TDLUs per tissue area, median TDLU span and median number of acini per TDLU. We validated our method on 40 additional WSIs by comparing with manually acquired measures. Our CNN models detected acini with an F1 score of 0.73±0.07, and segmented TDLUs and adipose tissue with Dice scores of 0.84±0.13 and 0.87±0.04, respectively. The inter-observer ICC scores for manual assessments on 40 WSIs of number of TDLUs per tissue area, median TDLU span, and median acini count per TDLU were 0.71, 0.81 and 0.73, respectively. Intra-observer reliability was evaluated on 10/40 WSIs with ICC scores of >0.8. Inter-observer ICC scores between automated results and the mean of the two observers were: 0.80 for number of TDLUs per tissue area, 0.57 for median TDLU span, and 0.80 for median acini count per TDLU. TDLU involution measures evaluated by manual and automated assessment were inversely associated with age and menopausal status. We developed a computational pathology method to measure TDLU involution. This technology eliminates the labor-intensiveness and subjectivity of manual TDLU assessment, and can be applied to future breast cancer risk studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32294107
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231653
pii: PONE-D-19-31727
pmc: PMC7159218
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0231653Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : K99 CA245900
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : UM1 CA186107
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U01 CA176726
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R21 CA187642
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no competing interests. Philips Research Europe is a commercial affiliation but this does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
Cancer. 2007 Jan 15;109(2):180-7
pubmed: 17154175
Cancer Immunol Res. 2019 Apr;7(4):609-620
pubmed: 30846441
Sci Rep. 2016 May 23;6:26286
pubmed: 27212078
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1975 Aug;55(2):231-73
pubmed: 169369
JAMA. 2017 Dec 12;318(22):2199-2210
pubmed: 29234806
Cancer. 2006 Sep 15;107(6):1240-7
pubmed: 16902983
Sci Rep. 2019 May 15;9(1):7449
pubmed: 31092853
Sci Transl Med. 2011 Nov 9;3(108):108ra113
pubmed: 22072638
IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2018 May;40(5):1182-1194
pubmed: 28129148
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Nov 15;98(22):1600-7
pubmed: 17105983
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Aug;159(1):163-72
pubmed: 27488681
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 16;11(8):e0161286
pubmed: 27529701
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Jul;128(1):243-50
pubmed: 21197570
Cancer. 2009 Apr 1;115(7):1404-11
pubmed: 19170235
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 10;27(35):5893-8
pubmed: 19805686
Front Med (Lausanne). 2019 Nov 22;6:264
pubmed: 31824952
Breast Cancer Res. 2012 Apr 18;14(2):R64
pubmed: 22513288
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 26;9(1):5174
pubmed: 30914794
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7(4):R555-62
pubmed: 15987462
Mod Pathol. 2018 Oct;31(10):1502-1512
pubmed: 29899550
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1994 Apr-May;3(3):219-24
pubmed: 8019370
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Oct 01;106(10):
pubmed: 25274491
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2015 Nov 05;2015:1899-908
pubmed: 26958289
Cancer. 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):424-9
pubmed: 8004616
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2013 Mar 29;8676:
pubmed: 25722829
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Feb;21(2):233-241
pubmed: 31926805
Med Image Anal. 2019 May;54:111-121
pubmed: 30861443
Nat Rev Cancer. 2005 May;5(5):388-96
pubmed: 15864280
NPJ Breast Cancer. 2018 Sep 21;4:33
pubmed: 30276234
Br J Cancer. 2008 Nov 4;99(9):1369-74
pubmed: 18781174
Breast Cancer Res. 2017 May 25;19(1):61
pubmed: 28545469
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2000;(27):17-37
pubmed: 10963618
Cancer. 2016 Feb 15;122(4):515-20
pubmed: 26565738
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986 Jun;154(6):1280-4
pubmed: 2424309
Oncotarget. 2016 Jul 12;7(28):44381-44394
pubmed: 27322148
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013 May;139(1):277-85
pubmed: 23609472
Lab Invest. 2019 Nov;99(11):1596-1606
pubmed: 31222166