Digital imaging in pathology: Whole-slide imaging and beyond

Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease

Volumn 8, Issue , 2013, Pages 331-359

  Ghaznavi, Farzad ^a   Evans, Andrew ^b   Madabhushi, Anant ^c   Feldman, Michael ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b TORONTO GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer assisted diagnostics; Histocytometry; Multispectral imaging; Nonlinear dimensionality reduction

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2;

AUTOFLUORESCENCE; CLINICAL EDUCATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONSULTATION; COST; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIGITAL IMAGING; DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS IN MEDICINE; GOLD STANDARD; GRADUATE STUDENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RETRIEVAL; IMAGING SYSTEM; IMMUNOFLUORESCENCE; IMMUNOFLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INFORMATION SYSTEM; LABORATORY PERSONNEL; LICENSING; LIQUID CRYSTAL; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MICROSCOPY; MICROTOMY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PURCHASING; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; STAFF TRAINING; TISSUE SECTION; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT; VALIDATION STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD;

DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84875905305     PISSN: 15534006     EISSN: 15534014     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-pathol-011811-120902     Document Type: Review

References (122)

1. Ho J, Parwani AV, Jukic DM, Yagi Y, Anthony L, Gilbertson Jr. 2006. Use of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology quality assurance: design and pilot validation studies. Hum. Pathol. 37:322-311
2. Pantanowitz L. 2010. Digital images and the future of digital pathology. J. Pathol. Inform. 1:155
3. Weinstein RS, Graham AR, Richter LC, Barker GP, Krupinski EA, et al. 2009. Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future. Hum. Pathol. 40:1057-699
4. Gilbertson JR, Ho J, Anthony L, Jukic DM, Yagi Y, Parwani AV. 2006. Primary histologic diagnosis using automated whole slide imaging: a validation study. BMC Clin. Pathol. 6:44
5. Williams S, Henricks WH, Becich MJ, Toscano M, Carter AB. 2010. Telepathology for patient care: What am I getting myself into? Adv. Anat. Pathol. 17:130-499
6. Della Mea V, Bortolotti N, Beltrami CA. 2009. eSlide suite: an open source software system for whole slide imaging. J. Clin. Pathol. 62:749-511
7. Evans AJ, Chetty R, Clarke BA, Croul S, Ghazarian DM, et al. 2009. Primary frozen section diagnosis by robotic microscopy and virtual slide telepathology: the University Health Network experience. Hum. Pathol. 40:1070-811
8. Massone C, Brunasso AM, Campbell TM, Soyer HP. 2008. State of the art of teledermatopathology. Am. J. Dermatopathol. 30:446-500
9. Difranco MD, O'Hurley G, Kay EW, Watson RW, Cunningham P. 2011. Ensemble based system for whole-slide prostate cancer probability mapping using color texture features. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 35:629-455
10. Gabril MY, Yousef GM. 2010. Informatics for practicing anatomical pathologists: marking a new era in pathology practice. Mod. Pathol. 23:349-588
11. Patterson ES, Rayo M, Gill C, Gurcan MN. 2011. Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology. J. Pathol. Inform. 2:99
12. Huisman A, Looijen A, van den Brink SM, van Diest PJ. 2010. Creation of a fully digital pathology slide archive by high-volume tissue slide scanning. Hum. Pathol. 41:751-577
13. Siegel EL, Kolonder RM. 1999. Filmless Radiology. New York: Springerr
14. Dee FR. 2009. Virtual microscopy in pathology education. Hum. Pathol. 40:1112-211
15. Hedvat CV. 2010. Digital microscopy: past, present, and future. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 134:1666-700
16. Thorstenson S. 2009. From the conventional microscope to the digital slide scanner in routine diagnostic histopathology. Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diegoo
17. Costello SS, Johnston DJ, Dervan PA, O'Shea DG. 2003. Development and evaluation of the virtual pathology slide: a new tool in telepathology. J. Med. Internet Res. 5:e111
18. Krupinski EA, Tillack AA, Richter L, Henderson JT, Bhattacharyya AK, et al. 2006. Eye-movement study and human performance using telepathology virtual slides: implications for medical education and differences with experience. Hum. Pathol. 37:1543-566
19. Stratman C. 2009. Digital pathology in the clinical histology lab: a time and motion study. Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diegoo
20. Velez N, Jukic D, Ho J. 2008. Evaluation of two whole-slide imaging applications in dermatopathology. Hum. Pathol. 39:1341-499
21. Bautista PA, Yagi Y. 2010. Improving the visualization and detection of tissue folds in whole slide images through color enhancement. J. Pathol. Inform. 1:255
22. Evered A, Dudding N. 2010. Accuracy and perceptions of virtual microscopy compared with glass slide microscopy in cervical cytology. Cytopathology 22:82-877
23. KalinskiT,Zwonitzer R, Sel S,EvertM,GuentherT, et al. 2008. Virtual3Dmicroscopy usingmultiplane whole slide images in diagnostic pathology. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 130:259-644
24. Thrall M, Pantanowitz L, Khalbuss W. 2011. Telecytology: clinical applications, current challenges, and future benefits. J. Pathol. Inform. 2:511
25. Schrader T, Niepage S, Leuthold T, Saeger K, Schluns K, et al. 2006. The diagnostic path, a useful visualisation tool in virtual microscopy. Diagn. Pathol. 1:400
26. DICOMStand. Comm. Work. Group 26 Pathol. 2008. Specimen Module and Revised Pathology SOP Classes, suppl. 122. Rosslyn, VA: DICOM. ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/final/sup122-ft2.pdff
27. DICOM Stand. Comm. Work. Group 26 Pathol. Whole Slide Microscopic Image IOD and SOP Classes, suppl. 145. Rosslyn, VA: DICOM. ftp://medical.nema.org/ medical/dicom/supps/sup145-ft.pdf.
28. Daniel C, Rojo MG, Klossa J, Della Mea V, Booker D, et al. 2011. Standardizing the use of whole slide images in digital pathology. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 35:496-5055
29. Krupinski EA. 2009. Virtual slide telepathology workstation of the future: lessons learned from teleradiology. Hum. Pathol. 40:1100-111
30. McClintock DS, Lee RE, Gilbertson Jr. 2012. Using computerized workflow simulations to assess the feasibility of whole slide imaging full adoption in a high-volume histology laboratory. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 35:57-644
31. Isaacs M, Lennerz JK, Yates S, Clermont W, Rossi J, Pfeifer JD. 2011. Implementation of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology: a value added approach. J. Pathol. Inform. 2:399
32. Evans AJ. 2011. Re: Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology. J. Pathol. Inform. 2:88
33. Evans AJ, Sinard JH, Fatheree LA, HenricksWH, Carter AB, et al. 2011. Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: recommendations of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 34:169-2033
34. JukicDM, Drogowski LM, Martina J, Parwani AV. 2011. Clinical examination and validation of primary diagnosis in anatomic pathology using whole slide digital images. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 135:372-788
35. Mooney E, Hood AF, Lampros J, KempfW, Jemec GB. 2011. Comparative diagnostic accuracy in virtual dermatopathology. Skin Res. Technol. 17:251-555
36. Chargari C, Comperat E, Magne N, Vedrine L, Houlgatte A, et al. 2011. Prostate needle biopsy examination by means of virtual microscopy. Pathol. Res. Pract. 207:366-699
37. Fine JL, Grzybicki DM, Silowash R, Ho J, Gilbertson JR, et al. 2008. Evaluation of whole slide image immunohistochemistry interpretation in challenging prostate needle biopsies. Hum. Pathol. 39:564-722
38. Tsuchihashi Y,Takamatsu T, Hashimoto Y,Takashima T, Nakano K, Fujita S. 2008. Use of virtual slide system for quick frozen intra-operative telepathology diagnosis in Kyoto, Japan. Diagn. Pathol. 3(Suppl. 1):66
39. Fallon MA, Wilbur DC, Prasad M. 2010. Ovarian frozen section diagnosis: Use of whole-slide imaging shows excellent correlation between virtual slide and original interpretations in a large series of cases. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 134:1020-233
40. Nielsen PS, Lindebjerg J, Rasmussen J, StarklintH,WaldstromM,Nielsen B. 2010. Virtual microscopy: an evaluation of its validity and diagnostic performance in routine histologic diagnosis of skin tumors. Hum. Pathol. 41:1770-766
41. Ramey JP, Fung K, Hassell LA. 2011. Validation of pathologist use of whole slide images for remote frozen section evaluation. Mod. Pathol. 24:436 (Abstr.))
42. Ramey JP, Fung K, Hassell LA. 2011. Use of mobile high resolution device for remote frozen section evaluation of whole slide images. Mod. Pathol. 24:341 (Abstr.))
43. ReyesC, Ikpatt F,NadijiM,Cote RJ. 2011. Is virtualmicroscopy ready for the prime time? A comparison with conventional microscopy. Mod. Pathol. 24:454 (Abstr.))
44. Ho J. 2009. Validating digital slides for clinical use:When is image quality good enough? Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diegoo
45. Sawai T, Uzuki M, Kamataki A, Tofukuji I. 2010. The state of telepathology in Japan. J. Pathol. Inform. 1:133
46. Rodriguez-Urrego PA, Cronin AM, Al-Ahmadie HA, Gopalan A, Tickoo SK, et al. 2011. Interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility in digital and routine microscopic assessment of prostate needle biopsies. Hum. Pathol. 42:68-744
47. Wilbur DC, Madi K, Colvin RB, Duncan LM, Faquin WC, et al. 2009. Whole-slide imaging digital pathology as a platform for teleconsultation: a pilot study using paired subspecialist correlations. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 133:1949-533
48. Bloom K. 2009. The virtual consultative network. Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diegoo
49. Spinosa JC. 2008. Minute by minute, digital a boon to tumor board. Coll. Am. Pathol. Today 2008 Arch.:Oct.
50. Hede K. 2008. Breast cancer testing scandal shines spotlight on black box of clinical laboratory testing. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 100:836-444
51. Lopez AM, Graham AR, Barker GP, Richter LC, Krupinski EA, et al. 2009. Virtual slide telepathology enables an innovative telehealth rapid breast care clinic. Hum. Pathol. 40:1082-911
52. Raab SS, Nakhleh RE, Ruby SG. 2005. Patient safety in anatomic pathology: measuring discrepancy frequencies and causes. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 129:459-666
53. Manion E, Cohen MB, Weydert J. 2008. Mandatory second opinion in surgical pathology referral material: clinical consequences of major disagreements. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 32:732-377
54. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Mahood LK, Parwani AV, Kuan SF, Rao UN. 2008. Effectiveness of random and focused review in detecting surgical pathology error. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 130:905-122
55. Woolgar JA, Ferlito A, Devaney KO, Rinaldo A, Barnes L. 2011. How trustworthy is a diagnosis in head and neck surgical pathology? A consideration of diagnostic discrepancies (errors). Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 268:643-511
56. Graham AR, Bhattacharyya AK, Scott KM, Lian F, Grasso LL, et al. 2009. Virtual slide telepathology for an academic teaching hospital surgical pathology quality assurance program. Hum. Pathol. 40:1129-366
57. Hassell LA, Fung KM, Chaser B. 2011. Digital slides and ACGME resident competencies in anatomic pathology: an altered paradigm for acquisition and assessment. J. Pathol. Inform. 2:277
58. Bruch LA, De Young BR, KreiterCD, HaugenTH, Leaven TC,Dee FR. 2009. Competency assessment of residents in surgical pathology using virtual microscopy. Hum. Pathol. 40:1122-288
59. Fonyad L, Gerely L, Cserneky M, Molnar B, Matolcsy A. 2010. Shifting gears higher - digital slides in graduate education - 4 years experience at Semmelweis University. Diagn. Pathol. 5:733
60. Li L, Dangott BJ, Parwani AV. 2010. Development and use of a genitourinary pathology digital teaching set for trainee education. J. Pathol. Inform. 1:22
61. Marchevsky AM,Khurana R, Thomas P, Scharre K, Farias P, Bose S. 2006. The use of virtualmicroscopy for proficiency testing in gynecologic cytopathology: a feasibility study using ScanScope. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 130:349-555
62. Stewart J 3rd, Miyazaki K, Bevans-Wilkins K, YeC, KurtyczDF, Selvaggi SM. 2007. Virtual microscopy for cytology proficiency testing: Are we there yet? Cancer 111:203-99
63. Fung KM, Hassell LA, Talbert ML, Wiechmann AF, Chaser BE, Ramey J. 2012. Whole slide images and digital media in pathology education, testing, and practice: the Oklahoma experience. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 35:37-400
64. van den Tweel JG, Bosman FT. 2011. The use of virtual slides in the EUROPALS examination. Diagn. Pathol. 6(Suppl. 1):233
65. Merk M, Knuechel R, Perez-Bouza A. 2010. Web-based virtual microscopy at the RWTH Aachen University: didactic concept, methods and analysis of acceptance by the students. Ann. Anat. 192:383-877
66. Paulsen FP, Eichhorn M, Brauer L. 2010. Virtual microscopy: the future of teaching histology in the medical curriculum? Ann. Anat. 192:378-822
67. Collier L, Dunham S, Braun MW, O'Loughlin VD. 2012. Optical versus virtual: teaching assistant perceptions of the use of virtual microscopy in an undergraduate human anatomy course. Anat. Sci. Educ. 5:10-199
68. Farah CS, Maybury TS. 2009. The e-evolution of microscopy in dental education. J. Dent. Educ. 73:942- 499
69. Helin H, Lundin M, Lundin J, Martikainen P, Tammela T, et al. 2005. Web-based virtual microscopy in teaching and standardizing Gleason grading. Hum. Pathol. 36:381-866
70. Lundin M, Lundin J, Helin H, Isola J. 2004. A digital atlas of breast histopathology: an application of Web based virtual microscopy. J. Clin. Pathol. 57:1288-911
71. Angeletti C, Harvey NR, Khomitch V, Fischer AH, Levenson RM, Rimm DL. 2005. Detection of malignancy in cytology specimens using spectral-spatial analysis. Lab. Investig. 85:1555-644
72. Jaganath R, Angeletti C, Levenson RM, Rimm DL. 2004. Diagnostic classification of urothelial cells in urine cytology specimens using exclusively spectral information. Cancer 102:186-911
73. Mansoor I, Zalles C, Zahid F, Gossage K, Levenson RM, Rimm DL. 2008. Fine-needle aspiration of follicular adenoma versus parathyroid adenoma: the utility of multispectral imaging in differentiating lesions with subtle cytomorphologic differences. Cancer 114:22-266
74. Levenson RM. 2006. Spectral imaging perspective on cytomics. Cytometry A 69:592-6000
75. Levenson RM, Lynch DT, KobayashiH, Backer JM, Backer MV. 2008. Multiplexing with multispectral imaging: from mice to microscopy. Inst. Lab. Anim. Res. J. 49:78-888
76. LevensonRM,Mansfield Jr. 2006. Multispectral imaging in biology andmedicine: slices of life. Cytometry A 69:748-588
77. Mansfield JR, Gossage KW, Hoyt CC, Levenson RM. 2005. Autofluorescence removal, multiplexing, and automated analysis methods for in-vivo fluorescence imaging. J. Biomed. Opt. 10:412077
78. Al-Kofahi Y, Lassoud W, Grama K, Nath S, Zhu J, et al. 2011. Cell-based quantification of molecular biomarkers in histopathology specimens. Histopathology 59:40-544
79. Al-Kofahi Y, Lassoued W, Lee W, Roysam B. 2010. Improved automatic detection and segmentation of cell nuclei in histopathology images. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57:841-522
80. Levenson RM. 2004. Spectral imaging and pathology: seeing more. Lab. Med. 4:244-511
81. Dicker DT, Lerner J, Van Belle P, Barth SF, Guerry D, et al. 2006. Differentiation of normal skin and melanoma using high resolution hyperspectral imaging. Cancer Biol. Ther. 5:1033-388
82. Keshava N. 2003. A survey of spectral unmixing algorithms. Lincoln Lab. J. 14:55-788
83. Woolfe F, Gerdes M, Bello M, Tao X, Can A. 2010. Autofluorescence removal by non-negative matrix factorization. IEEE Trans. Image Process 20:1085-933
84. Moeder CB, Giltnane JM, Moulis SP, Rimm DL. 2009. Quantitative, fluorescence-based in situ assessment of protein expression. Methods Mol. Biol. 520:163-755
85. Dolled-FilhartM, Gustavson M, Camp RL, Rimm DL, Tonkinson JL, Christiansen J. 2010. Automated analysis of tissue microarrays. Methods Mol. Biol. 664:151-622
86. Menard S, Balsari A, Tagliabue E, Camerini T, Casalini P, et al. 2008. Biology, prognosis and response to therapy of breast carcinomas according to HER2 score. Ann. Oncol. 19:1706-122
87. ChivukulaM, Bhargava R, Brufsky A, Surti U, Dabbs DJ. 2008. Clinical importance of HER2 immunohistologic heterogeneous expression in core-needle biopsies versus resection specimens for equivocal (immunohistochemical score 2+) cases. Mod. Pathol. 21:363-688
88. Kurosumi M. 2007. Immunohistochemical assessment of hormone receptor status using a new scoring system ( J-score) in breast cancer. Breast Cancer 14:189-933
89. Camp RL,Chung GG, Rimm DL. 2002. Automated subcellular localization and quantification of protein expression in tissue microarrays. Nat. Med. 8:1323-277
90. Ryan D, Mulrane L, Rexhepaj E, Gallagher WM. 2011. Tissue microarrays and digital image analysis. Methods Mol. Biol. 691:97-1122
91. Mulrane L, Rexhepaj E, Penney S, Callanan JJ, Gallagher WM. 2008. Automated image analysis in histopathology: a valuable tool in medical diagnostics. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 8:707-255
92. Taylor CR, Levenson RM. 2006. Quantification of immunohistochemistry - issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment. II. Histopathology 49:411-244
93. Anagnostou VK, Welsh AW, Giltnane JM, Siddiqui S, Liceaga C, et al. 2010. Analytic variability in immunohistochemistry biomarker studies. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 19:982-911
94. Emerson JW, Dolled-FilhartM,Harris L, Rimm DL, Tuck DP. 2009. Quantitative assessment of tissue biomarkers and construction of a model to predict outcome in breast cancer using multiple imputation. Cancer Inform. 7:29-400
95. Rodenacker K, Bengtsson E. 2003. A feature set for cytometry on digitized microscopic images. Anal. Cell Pathol. 25:1-366
96. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. 1998. Collective dynamics of "small- world" networks. Nature 393:440-422
97. Wuchty S, Stadler PF. 2003. Centers of complex networks. J. Theor. Biol. 223:45-533
98. Boucheron LE, Harvey NR, Manjunath BS. 2008. On using cytoplasm and stroma features in automated cancer diagnosis. Presented at Workshop Bio-Image Inform. Biol. Imaging, Comput. Vis. Data Min., Santa Barbaraa
99. Peng Y, Wu Z, Jiang J. 2009. A novel feature selection approach for biomedical data classification. J. Biomed. Inform. 43:15-233
100. Sima C, Dougherty ER. 2006. What should be expected from feature selection in small-sample settings. Bioinformatics 22:2430-366
101. Xiong M, Fang X, Zhao J. 2001. Biomarker identification by feature wrappers. Genome Res. 11:1878-877
102. Jain A, Zongker D. 1997. Feature selection: evaluation, application, and small sample performance. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 19:153-588
103. Jolliffe IT. 2002. Principal Component Analysis. New York: Springerr
104. Qiao H, Zhang P, Zhang B, Zheng S. 2009. Learning an intrinsic-variable preserving manifold for dynamic visual tracking. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B 40:868-800
105. Takahashi S, Fujishiro I, Okada M. 2009. Applying manifold learning to plotting approximate contour trees. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 15:1185-922
106. Hou Y, Zhang P, Xu X, Zhang X, Li W. 2009. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear inlaying. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 20:300-155
107. Li X, Lin S, Yan S, Xu D. 2008. Discriminant locally linear embedding with high-order tensor data. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B 38:342-522
108. Law MH, Jain AK. 2006. Incremental nonlinear dimensionality reduction by manifold learning. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 28:377-911
109. Madabhushi A, Yang P, Rosen M, Weinstein S. 2006. Distinguishing lesions from posterior acoustic shadowing in breast ultrasound via non-linear dimensionality reduction. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 1:3070-733
110. Yan S, Xu D, Zhang B, Zhang HJ, Yang Q, Lin S. 2007. Graph embedding and extensions: a general framework for dimensionality reduction. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 29:40-511
111. Madabhushi A, Shi J, Rosen M, Tomaszeweski JE, Feldman MD. 2005. Graph embedding to improve supervised classification and novel class detection: application to prostate cancer. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 8:729-377
112. Kuncheva LI. 1993. An aggregation of pro and con evidence for medical decision support systems. Comput. Biol. Med. 23:417-244
113. Kuncheva LI. 1991. Evaluation of computerizedmedical diagnostic decisions via fuzzy sets. Int. J. Biomed. Comput. 28:91-1000
114. Kuncheva LI. 1990. Fuzzy multi-level classifier for medical applications. Comput. Biol. Med. 20:421-311
115. Doyle S, Hwang M, Shah K,Madabhushi A, Tomaszeweski J, Feldman M. 2007. Automated grading of prostate cancer using architectural and textural image features. Int. Symp. Biomed. Imaging, pp. 1284-877
116. Rajpoot K, Rajpoot N. 2004. SVM optimization for hyperspectral colon tissue cell classification. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 2:829-377
117. Qureshi HNR, Wilson R, Nattkemper T, Hans V. 2007. Comparative analysis of discriminant wavelet packet features and raw image features for classification of meningioma subtypes. Presented at Med. Image Underst. Anal., Aberystwyth,Waless
118. Doyle S,Madabhushi A, Feldman M, Tomaszeweski J. 2006. A boosting cascade for automated detection of prostate cancer from digitized histology. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 9:504-111
119. Jafari-Khouzani K, Soltanian-Zadeh H. 2003. Multiwavelet grading of pathological images of prostate. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 50:697-7044
120. Tabesh A, Teverovskiy M, Pang HY, Kumar VP, Verbel D, et al. 2007. Multifeature prostate cancer diagnosis and Gleason grading of histological images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 26:1366-788
121. Madabhushi A, Doyle S, Lee G, Basavanhally A, Monaco J, et al. 2010. Integrated diagnostics: a conceptual framework with examples. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 48:989-988
122. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, Marinelli RJ, Nielsen TO, et al. 2011. Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci. Transl. Med. 3:108ra133