A Fully Automated and Explainable Algorithm for the Prediction of Malignant Transformation in Oral Epithelial Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) is a premalignant histopathological diagnosis given to lesions of the oral cavity. Its grading suffers from significant inter-/intra-observer variability, and does not reliably predict malignancy progression, potentially leading to suboptimal treatment decisions. To address this, we developed a novel artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm, that assigns an Oral Malignant Transformation (OMT) risk score based on the Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) stained whole slide image (WSI). Our AI pipeline leverages an in-house segmentation model to detect and segment both nuclei and epithelium. Subsequently, a shallow neural network utilises interpretable morphological and spatial features, emulating histological markers, to predict progression. We conducted internal cross-validation on our development cohort (Sheffield; n = 193 cases) and independent validation on two external cohorts (Birmingham and Belfast; n = 89 cases). The proposed OMTscore achieved an AUROC ≥ 0.75 in predicting OED progression. Survival analyses showed the prognostic value of our OMTscore, compared to WHO and binary grades. Nuclear analyses elucidated the presence of peri-epithelial and epithelium-infiltrating lymphocytes in highly predictive patches of transforming cases (p < 0.0001). This is the first study to propose a completely automated, interpretable and externally validated algorithm for predicting OED transformation. Our algorithm shows better-than-human-level performance, offering a promising solution to the challenges of grading OED in routine clinical practice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".