Skip to main content

Prostate Cancer Grading Using Multistage Deep Neural Networks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Machine Learning, Image Processing, Network Security and Data Sciences

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 946))

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly occurring cancer in men with a high incidence to mortality ratio. Accurate prostate cancer grading is the foremost step in determining the precise treatment process for the patient in preventing mortality of the patient. Currently, the grading is carried out by pathologists, which has limitation of availability super specialist doctors across world to grade it at affordable price, and non-super specialist doctor grading is error prone. This paper evades the need for an expert pathologist by proposing a novel deep learning method for automatic screening of prostate images to detect and assign a grade severity of cancer based on the images. The explainability of classification model imbibed using gradient-weighted class activation mapping (GradCAM) visualization, which generate heatmap of image, which influenced the decision of the model. The proposed method has three stages with ensemble deep neural networks to grade the prostate cancer. Firstly, a UNet is used for the segmentation of the histopathological image. Subsequently, the segmented image is overlaid on the original image, which helps underscore the most critical regions determining the grade of cancer. Finally, the overlaid image is used by an ensemble model consisting of Xception, Resnet-50, EfficientNet-b7 to predict the final grade of the histopathological image. The dataset containing 10,000 histopathological images obtained from Karolinska and Radboud that are made publicly available through the Prostate Cancer Grade Assessment Challenge hosted in Kaggle is used for training and evaluation. This method achieves a classification accuracy of 92.38% and outperforms many state-of-the-art methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68(6):394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492. Epub 12 Sept 2018. Erratum in: CA Cancer J Clin 70(4):313. PMID: 30207593

  2. Epstein JI (2010) An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol 183(2):433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.046. Epub 14 Dec 2009. PMID: 20006878

  3. Allsbrook W, Mangold K, Johnson M, Lane R, Lane C, Amin M, Bostwick D, Humphrey P, Jones E, Reuter V, Sakr W, Sesterhenn I, Troncoso P, Wheeler T, Epstein J (2001) Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists. Hum Pathol 32:74–80. https://doi.org/10.1053/hupa.2001.21134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Egevad L, Ahmad AS, Algaba F, Berney DM, Boccon-Gibod L, Compérat E, Evans AJ, Griffiths D, Grobholz R, Kristiansen G, Langner C, Lopez-Beltran A, Montironi R, Moss S, Oliveira P, Vainer B, Varma M, Camparo P (2013) Standardization of Gleason grading among 337 European pathologists. Histopathology 62(2):247–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12008. PMID: 23240715

  5. Leenders I (2020) The 2019 international society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 44(8)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Revisiting prostate biopsy with 2014 ISUP modified Gleason score and Gleason grade—a cross section study—scientific figure on ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/2014-ISUP-Gleason-score-and-Gleason-grade-groups-15_tbl1_329964806

  7. Swiderska-Chadaj Z, de Bel T, Blanchet L et al (2020) Impact of rescanning and normalization on convolutional neural network performance in multi-center, whole-slide classification of prostate cancer. Sci Rep 10:14398. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71420-0

  8. Komura D, Ishikawa S (2018) Machine learning methods for histopathological image analysis. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 16:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pinckaers H, Bulten W, Laak J, Litjens G (2021) Detection of prostate cancer in whole-slide images through end-to-end training with image-level labels. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1

    Google Scholar 

  10. Campanella T (2019) Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images. Nat Med 25(8):1301–1309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ing N, Ma Z, Li J, Salemi H, Arnold C, Knudsen BS, Gertych A (2018) Semantic segmentation for prostate cancer grading by convolutional neural networks. In: Medical imaging 2018: digital pathology. SPIE, pp 343–355

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ing N, Ma Z, Li J, Salemi H, Arnold C, Knudsen B, Gertych A (2018) Semantic segmentation for prostate cancer grading by convolutional neural networks. In: Medical imaging 2018: digital pathology, pp 105811B

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bulten W, Pinckaers H, Boven H, Vink R, Bel T, Ginneken B, Laak J, Kaa C, Litjens G (2020) Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 21(2):233–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T (2015) U-Net, convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nagpal K, Foote D, Liu Y, Chen PH, Wulczyn E, Tan F, Olson N, Smith J, Mohtashamian A, Wren J, Corrado G, MacDonald R, Peng L, Amin M, Evans A, Sangoi A, Mermel C, Hipp J, Stumpe M (2019) Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for improving Gleason scoring of prostate cancer. npj Digit Med 2:48

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lucas H (2019) Deep learning for automatic Gleason pattern classification for grade group determination of prostate biopsies. Virchows Arch 475(1):77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaggle.com (2021) Prostate cANcer graDe Assessment (PANDA) challenge | Kaggle. [Online]. Available at: https://www.kaggle.com/c/prostate-cancer-grade-assessment/data

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramya Bygari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Bygari, R., Rithesh, K., Ambesange, S., Koolagudi, S.G. (2023). Prostate Cancer Grading Using Multistage Deep Neural Networks. In: Doriya, R., Soni, B., Shukla, A., Gao, XZ. (eds) Machine Learning, Image Processing, Network Security and Data Sciences. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 946. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5868-7_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5868-7_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-5867-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-5868-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics