Evaluation of an open-source machine-learning tool to quantify bone marrow plasma cells
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: The objective of this study was to develop and validate an open-source digital pathology tool, QuPath, to automatically quantify CD138-positive bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs). METHODS: We analysed CD138-scanned slides in QuPath. In the initial training phase, manual positive and negative cell counts were performed in representative areas of 10 bone marrow biopsies. Values from the manual counts were used to fine-tune parameters to detect BMPCs, using the positive cell detection and neural network (NN) classifier functions. In the testing phase, whole-slide images in an additional 40 cases were analysed. Output from the NN classifier was compared with two pathologist's estimates of BMPC percentage. RESULTS: The training set included manual counts ranging from 2403 to 17 287 cells per slide, with a median BMPC percentage of 13% (range: 3.1%-80.7%). In the testing phase, the quantification of plasma cells by image analysis correlated well with manual counting, particularly when restricted to BMPC percentages of <30% (Pearson's r=0.96, p<0.001). Concordance between the NN classifier and the pathologist whole-slide estimates was similarly good, with an intraclass correlation of 0.83 and a weighted kappa for the NN classifier of 0.80 with the first rater and 0.90 with the second rater. This was similar to the weighted kappa between the two human raters (0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This represents a validated digital pathology tool to assist in automatically and reliably counting BMPC percentage on CD138-stained slides with an acceptable error rate.
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 | 0.009 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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