Cargando…
Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms
PURPOSE: Validation of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in digital pathology with a reference standard is necessary before widespread clinical use, but few examples focus on creating a reference standard based on pathologist annotations. This work assesses the results of a pilot study that co...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9326105/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.9.4.047501 |
_version_ | 1784757203897417728 |
---|---|
author | Elfer, Katherine Dudgeon, Sarah Garcia, Victor Blenman, Kim Hytopoulos, Evangelos Wen, Si Li, Xiaoxian Ly, Amy Werness, Bruce Sheth, Manasi S. Amgad, Mohamed Gupta, Rajarsi Saltz, Joel Hanna, Matthew G. Ehinger, Anna Peeters, Dieter Salgado, Roberto Gallas, Brandon D. |
author_facet | Elfer, Katherine Dudgeon, Sarah Garcia, Victor Blenman, Kim Hytopoulos, Evangelos Wen, Si Li, Xiaoxian Ly, Amy Werness, Bruce Sheth, Manasi S. Amgad, Mohamed Gupta, Rajarsi Saltz, Joel Hanna, Matthew G. Ehinger, Anna Peeters, Dieter Salgado, Roberto Gallas, Brandon D. |
author_sort | Elfer, Katherine |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Validation of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in digital pathology with a reference standard is necessary before widespread clinical use, but few examples focus on creating a reference standard based on pathologist annotations. This work assesses the results of a pilot study that collects density estimates of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) in breast cancer biopsy specimens. This work will inform the creation of a validation dataset for the evaluation of AI algorithms fit for a regulatory purpose. APPROACH: Collaborators and crowdsourced pathologists contributed glass slides, digital images, and annotations. Here, “annotations” refer to any marks, segmentations, measurements, or labels a pathologist adds to a report, image, region of interest (ROI), or biological feature. Pathologists estimated sTILs density in 640 ROIs from hematoxylin and eosin stained slides of 64 patients via two modalities: an optical light microscope and two digital image viewing platforms. RESULTS: The pilot study generated 7373 sTILs density estimates from 29 pathologists. Analysis of annotations found the variability of density estimates per ROI increases with the mean; the root mean square differences were 4.46, 14.25, and 26.25 as the mean density ranged from 0% to 10%, 11% to 40%, and 41% to 100%, respectively. The pilot study informs three areas of improvement for future work: technical workflows, annotation platforms, and agreement analysis methods. Upgrades to the workflows and platforms will improve operability and increase annotation speed and consistency. CONCLUSIONS: Exploratory data analysis demonstrates the need to develop new statistical approaches for agreement. The pilot study dataset and analysis methods are publicly available to allow community feedback. The development and results of the validation dataset will be publicly available to serve as an instructive tool that can be replicated by developers and researchers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9326105 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93261052023-07-27 Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms Elfer, Katherine Dudgeon, Sarah Garcia, Victor Blenman, Kim Hytopoulos, Evangelos Wen, Si Li, Xiaoxian Ly, Amy Werness, Bruce Sheth, Manasi S. Amgad, Mohamed Gupta, Rajarsi Saltz, Joel Hanna, Matthew G. Ehinger, Anna Peeters, Dieter Salgado, Roberto Gallas, Brandon D. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Digital Pathology PURPOSE: Validation of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in digital pathology with a reference standard is necessary before widespread clinical use, but few examples focus on creating a reference standard based on pathologist annotations. This work assesses the results of a pilot study that collects density estimates of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) in breast cancer biopsy specimens. This work will inform the creation of a validation dataset for the evaluation of AI algorithms fit for a regulatory purpose. APPROACH: Collaborators and crowdsourced pathologists contributed glass slides, digital images, and annotations. Here, “annotations” refer to any marks, segmentations, measurements, or labels a pathologist adds to a report, image, region of interest (ROI), or biological feature. Pathologists estimated sTILs density in 640 ROIs from hematoxylin and eosin stained slides of 64 patients via two modalities: an optical light microscope and two digital image viewing platforms. RESULTS: The pilot study generated 7373 sTILs density estimates from 29 pathologists. Analysis of annotations found the variability of density estimates per ROI increases with the mean; the root mean square differences were 4.46, 14.25, and 26.25 as the mean density ranged from 0% to 10%, 11% to 40%, and 41% to 100%, respectively. The pilot study informs three areas of improvement for future work: technical workflows, annotation platforms, and agreement analysis methods. Upgrades to the workflows and platforms will improve operability and increase annotation speed and consistency. CONCLUSIONS: Exploratory data analysis demonstrates the need to develop new statistical approaches for agreement. The pilot study dataset and analysis methods are publicly available to allow community feedback. The development and results of the validation dataset will be publicly available to serve as an instructive tool that can be replicated by developers and researchers. Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers 2022-07-27 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9326105/ /pubmed/35911208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.9.4.047501 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI. |
spellingShingle | Digital Pathology Elfer, Katherine Dudgeon, Sarah Garcia, Victor Blenman, Kim Hytopoulos, Evangelos Wen, Si Li, Xiaoxian Ly, Amy Werness, Bruce Sheth, Manasi S. Amgad, Mohamed Gupta, Rajarsi Saltz, Joel Hanna, Matthew G. Ehinger, Anna Peeters, Dieter Salgado, Roberto Gallas, Brandon D. Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title | Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title_full | Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title_fullStr | Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title_full_unstemmed | Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title_short | Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
title_sort | pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms |
topic | Digital Pathology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9326105/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.9.4.047501 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elferkatherine pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT dudgeonsarah pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT garciavictor pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT blenmankim pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT hytopoulosevangelos pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT wensi pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT lixiaoxian pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT lyamy pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT wernessbruce pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT shethmanasis pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT amgadmohamed pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT guptarajarsi pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT saltzjoel pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT hannamatthewg pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT ehingeranna pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT peetersdieter pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT salgadoroberto pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms AT gallasbrandond pilotstudytoevaluatetoolstocollectpathologistannotationsforvalidatingmachinelearningalgorithms |