The paper describes the key component of the Multimodal Cell Analysis approach, a novel cytologic evaluation method for early cancer detection. The approach is based on repeated staining of a cell smear. The correlation of features and data extracted from the different stains, and related to relocated individual cells, may yield a dramatic increase of diagnostic reliability.In order to utilise the technique, fully automatic, adaptive image preprocessing techniques need to be applied, which are described in this article: coregistration of multimodal images, segmentation, and classification of cell nuclei. The presented feasibility study shows both efficiency and robustness of all steps being high regarding medical image material, and it strongly supports clinical application.

lichen planus mucosae. RESULTS: The stepwise application of 2 additional approaches (morphology, DNA content, argyrophilic nucleolar organizer region counts) increased the specificity of conventional cytologic diagnosis from 92.6% to 100%. This feasibility study provided a proof of concept, demonstrating efficiency,

No abstract

Background The average sensitivity of conventional cytology for the identification of cancer cells in effusion specimens is only approximately 58%. DNA image cytometry (DNA‐ICM), which exploits the DNA content of morphologically suspicious nuclei measured on digital images, has a sensitivity of up to 91% for the detection of cancer cells. However, when performed manually, to our knowledge to date, an expert needs approximately 60 minutes for the analysis of a single slide. Methods In the current study, the authors present a novel method of supervised machine learning for the automated identification of morphologically suspicious mesothelial and epithelial nuclei in Feulgen‐stained effusion specimens. The authors compared this with manual DNA‐ICM and a gold standard cytological diagnosis for 121 cases. Furthermore, the authors retrospectively analyzed whether the amount of morphometrically abnormal mesothelial or epithelial nuclei detected by the digital classifier could be used as an additional diagnostic marker. Results The presented semiautomated DNA karyometric solution identified more diagnostically relevant abnormal nuclei compared with manual DNA‐ICM, which led to a higher sensitivity (76.4% vs 68.5%) at a specificity of 100%. The ratio between digitally abnormal and all mesothelial nuclei was found to identify cancer cell–positive slides at 100% sensitivity and 70% specificity. The time effort for an expert therefore is reduced to the verification of a few nuclei with exceeding DNA content, which to our knowledge can be accomplished within 5 minutes. Conclusions The authors have created and validated a computer‐assisted bimodal karyometric approach for which both nuclear morphology and DNA are quantified from a Feulgen‐stained slide. DNA karyometry thus increases the diagnostic accuracy and reduces the workload of an expert when compared with manual DNA‐ICM.

No abstract