4.7 Article

Quantifying the effects of data augmentation and stain color normalization in convolutional neural networks for computational pathology

Journal

MEDICAL IMAGE ANALYSIS
Volume 58, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2019.101544

Keywords

Deep learning; Convolutional neural network; Computational pathology

Funding

  1. Radboud Institute of Health Sciences (RIHS), Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  2. Dutch Cancer Society [KUN 2015-7970]
  3. Alpe d'HuZes fund [KUN 2014-7032]
  4. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [825292]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Stain variation is a phenomenon observed when distinct pathology laboratories stain tissue slides that exhibit similar but not identical color appearance. Due to this color shift between laboratories, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) trained with images from one lab often underperform on unseen images from the other lab. Several techniques have been proposed to reduce the generalization error, mainly grouped into two categories: stain color augmentation and stain color normalization. The former simulates a wide variety of realistic stain variations during training, producing stain-invariant CNNs. The latter aims to match training and test color distributions in order to reduce stain variation. For the first time, we compared some of these techniques and quantified their effect on CNN classification performance using a heterogeneous dataset of hematoxylin and eosin histopathology images from 4 organs and 9 pathology laboratories. Additionally, we propose a novel unsupervised method to perform stain color normalization using a neural network. Based on our experimental results, we provide practical guidelines on how to use stain color augmentation and stain color normalization in future computational pathology applications. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available