P137 Preliminary validation of a multi-stage machine learning algorithm to assess histological inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The histologic assessment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) relies on qualitative grading methods. Although widely accepted, these instruments are time consuming, require specialized training, and suffer from inter-rater disagreement. For these reasons there is a need for more consistent and less biased methods to assess IBD histology. Methods The algorithm was initially developed using hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained whole slide images of colon biopsies (238 ulcerative colitis [UC], 30 Crohn’s Disease [CD], and 28 endoscopically normal adjacent [ENA]). The first two stages implement convolutional neural networks (CNN) which segment 11 key anatomical features (Figure 1). The third stage extracts the features and models them for prediction. Results The first stage of the algorithm was validated on an independent test dataset by calculating the intersection-over-union (IoU) for the ground truth and prediction masks, resulting in a value of 0.97. A preliminary validation for stage 2 was performed by randomly selecting 30 unique biopsy sections from the test dataset and applying a 150um x 150um counting frame. An expert gastrointestinal pathologist confirmed correct cell identification by the algorithm for three of the primary inflammatory cell types: plasma cells, eosinophils, and neutrophils which resulted in a sensitivity/specificity of 0.76/0.99, 0.78/1.00, and 1.00/0.98 respectively. The final stage predicts RHI grades which could be directly compared to pathologist reads (Figure 2, 3, and 4). Conclusion This is the first study to demonstrate the value of machine learning to assess histologic activity in IBD. These methods lay the foundations for future work, and we believe stages 1 and 2 can be explored independently to statistically characterize the histologic changes of IBD, enabling the improvement of preexisting grading systems.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".