Development and initial validation of a deep learning algorithm to quantify histological features in colorectal carcinoma including tumour budding/poorly differentiated clusters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims To develop and validate a deep learning algorithm to quantify a broad spectrum of histological features in colorectal carcinoma. Methods and results A deep learning algorithm was trained on haematoxylin and eosin‐stained slides from tissue microarrays of colorectal carcinomas ( N = 230) to segment colorectal carcinoma digitised images into 13 regions and one object. The segmentation algorithm demonstrated moderate to almost perfect agreement with interpretations by gastrointestinal pathologists, and was applied to an independent test cohort of digitised whole slides of colorectal carcinoma ( N = 136). The algorithm correctly classified mucinous and high‐grade tumours, and identified significant differences between mismatch repair‐proficient and mismatch repair‐deficient (MMRD) tumours with regard to mucin, inflammatory stroma, and tumour‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). A cutoff of >44.4 TILs per mm 2 carcinoma gave a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 73% in classifying MMRD carcinomas. Algorithm measures of tumour budding (TB) and poorly differentiated clusters (PDCs) outperformed TB grade derived from routine sign‐out, and compared favourably with manual counts of TB/PDCs with regard to lymphatic, venous and perineural invasion. Comparable associations were seen between algorithm measures of TB/PDCs and manual counts of TB/PDCs for lymph node metastasis (all P < 0.001); however, stronger correlations were seen between the proportion of positive lymph nodes and algorithm measures of TB/PDCs. Stronger associations were also seen between distant metastasis and algorithm measures of TB/PDCs ( P = 0.004) than between distant metastasis and TB ( P = 0.04) and TB/PDC counts ( P = 0.06). Conclusions Our results highlight the potential of deep learning to identify and quantify a broad spectrum of histological features in colorectal carcinoma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it