-
Applications of artificial intelligence in the analysis of histopathology images of gliomas: a review
Authors:
Jan-Philipp Redlich,
Friedrich Feuerhake,
Joachim Weis,
Nadine S. Schaadt,
Sarah Teuber-Hanselmann,
Christoph Buck,
Sabine Luttmann,
Andrea Eberle,
Stefan Nikolin,
Arno Appenzeller,
Andreas Portmann,
André Homeyer
Abstract:
In recent years, the diagnosis of gliomas has become increasingly complex. Analysis of glioma histopathology images using artificial intelligence (AI) offers new opportunities to support diagnosis and outcome prediction. To give an overview of the current state of research, this review examines 70 publicly available research studies that have proposed AI-based methods for whole-slide histopatholog…
▽ More
In recent years, the diagnosis of gliomas has become increasingly complex. Analysis of glioma histopathology images using artificial intelligence (AI) offers new opportunities to support diagnosis and outcome prediction. To give an overview of the current state of research, this review examines 70 publicly available research studies that have proposed AI-based methods for whole-slide histopathology images of human gliomas, covering the diagnostic tasks of subty** (16/70), grading (23/70), molecular marker prediction (13/70), and survival prediction (27/70). All studies were reviewed with regard to methodological aspects as well as clinical applicability. It was found that the focus of current research is the assessment of hematoxylin and eosin-stained tissue sections of adult-type diffuse gliomas. The majority of studies (49/70) are based on the publicly available glioblastoma and low-grade glioma datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and only a few studies employed other datasets in isolation (10/70) or in addition to the TCGA datasets (11/70). Current approaches mostly rely on convolutional neural networks (53/70) for analyzing tissue at 20x magnification (30/70). A new field of research is the integration of clinical data, omics data, or magnetic resonance imaging (27/70). So far, AI-based methods have achieved promising results, but are not yet used in real clinical settings. Future work should focus on the independent validation of methods on larger, multi-site datasets with high-quality and up-to-date clinical and molecular pathology annotations to demonstrate routine applicability.
△ Less
Submitted 5 February, 2024; v1 submitted 26 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Digitization of Pathology Labs: A Review of Lessons Learned
Authors:
Lars Ole Schwen,
Tim-Rasmus Kiehl,
Rita Carvalho,
Norman Zerbe,
André Homeyer
Abstract:
Pathology laboratories are increasingly using digital workflows. This has the potential of increasing lab efficiency, but the digitization process also involves major challenges. Several reports have been published describing the individual experiences of specific laboratories with the digitization process. However, a comprehensive overview of the lessons learned is still lacking. We provide an ov…
▽ More
Pathology laboratories are increasingly using digital workflows. This has the potential of increasing lab efficiency, but the digitization process also involves major challenges. Several reports have been published describing the individual experiences of specific laboratories with the digitization process. However, a comprehensive overview of the lessons learned is still lacking. We provide an overview of the lessons learned for different aspects of the digitization process, including digital case management, digital slide reading, and computer-aided slide reading. We also cover metrics used for monitoring performance and pitfalls and corresponding values observed in practice. The overview is intended to help pathologists, IT decision-makers, and administrators to benefit from the experiences of others and to implement the digitization process in an optimal way to make their own laboratory future-proof.
△ Less
Submitted 7 June, 2023; v1 submitted 6 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
Recommendations on test datasets for evaluating AI solutions in pathology
Authors:
André Homeyer,
Christian Geißler,
Lars Ole Schwen,
Falk Zakrzewski,
Theodore Evans,
Klaus Strohmenger,
Max Westphal,
Roman David Bülow,
Michaela Kargl,
Aray Karjauv,
Isidre Munné-Bertran,
Carl Orge Retzlaff,
Adrià Romero-López,
Tomasz Sołtysiński,
Markus Plass,
Rita Carvalho,
Peter Steinbach,
Yu-Chia Lan,
Nassim Bouteldja,
David Haber,
Mateo Rojas-Carulla,
Alireza Vafaei Sadr,
Matthias Kraft,
Daniel Krüger,
Rutger Fick
, et al. (5 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions that automatically extract information from digital histology images have shown great promise for improving pathological diagnosis. Prior to routine use, it is important to evaluate their predictive performance and obtain regulatory approval. This assessment requires appropriate test datasets. However, compiling such datasets is challenging and specific recom…
▽ More
Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions that automatically extract information from digital histology images have shown great promise for improving pathological diagnosis. Prior to routine use, it is important to evaluate their predictive performance and obtain regulatory approval. This assessment requires appropriate test datasets. However, compiling such datasets is challenging and specific recommendations are missing.
A committee of various stakeholders, including commercial AI developers, pathologists, and researchers, discussed key aspects and conducted extensive literature reviews on test datasets in pathology. Here, we summarize the results and derive general recommendations for the collection of test datasets.
We address several questions: Which and how many images are needed? How to deal with low-prevalence subsets? How can potential bias be detected? How should datasets be reported? What are the regulatory requirements in different countries?
The recommendations are intended to help AI developers demonstrate the utility of their products and to help regulatory agencies and end users verify reported performance measures. Further research is needed to formulate criteria for sufficiently representative test datasets so that AI solutions can operate with less user intervention and better support diagnostic workflows in the future.
△ Less
Submitted 21 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Evaluating Generic Auto-ML Tools for Computational Pathology
Authors:
Lars Ole Schwen,
Daniela Schacherer,
Christian Geißler,
André Homeyer
Abstract:
Image analysis tasks in computational pathology are commonly solved using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The selection of a suitable CNN architecture and hyperparameters is usually done through exploratory iterative optimization, which is computationally expensive and requires substantial manual work. The goal of this article is to evaluate how generic tools for neural network architecture…
▽ More
Image analysis tasks in computational pathology are commonly solved using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The selection of a suitable CNN architecture and hyperparameters is usually done through exploratory iterative optimization, which is computationally expensive and requires substantial manual work. The goal of this article is to evaluate how generic tools for neural network architecture search and hyperparameter optimization perform for common use cases in computational pathology. For this purpose, we evaluated one on-premises and one cloud-based tool for three different classification tasks for histological images: tissue classification, mutation prediction, and grading.
We found that the default CNN architectures and parameterizations of the evaluated AutoML tools already yielded classification performance on par with the original publications. Hyperparameter optimization for these tasks did not substantially improve performance, despite the additional computational effort. However, performance varied substantially between classifiers obtained from individual AutoML runs due to non-deterministic effects.
Generic CNN architectures and AutoML tools could thus be a viable alternative to manually optimizing CNN architectures and parametrizations. This would allow developers of software solutions for computational pathology to focus efforts on harder-to-automate tasks such as data curation.
△ Less
Submitted 7 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
