MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416085666 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaf201.1053

PATH-101. Neuropath-AI, a histopathology-based deep learning classifier for CNS tumors, achieves and improves human neuropathologist-level performance

2025· article· en· W4416085666 on OpenAlexaff
H. Lalchungnunga, Christopher H. Dampier, Omkar Singh, Danh-Tai Hoang, Eldad D. Shulman, Zied Abdullaev, Bochong Li, Zhirui Luo, Thomas M. Pearce, Daniel F. Marker, Craig Horbinski, Calixto‐Hope G. Lucas, Patrick J. Cimino, MacLean P. Nasrallah, Martha Quezado, Hye‐Jung Chung, Leeor Yefet, Gelareh Zadeh, Sebastian Brandner, Eytan Ruppin, Kenneth Aldape

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)Deep learningLimitingPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkProbabilistic classification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Molecular testing has become critical components in the diagnostic classification of the central nervous system (CNS) tumors. However, these methods require substantial resources, limiting accessibility for many patients. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and computer vision empower deep learning models to infer molecular features from histopathology images, which may often be more readily available than molecular testing, to classify CNS tumors. We trained pan-CNS tumor models to predict DNA methylation and gene expression from whole-slide images (WSIs). These molecular predictions were then used in a hierarchical machine learning framework, termed Neuropath-AI, to predict nine broad tumor families and 52 tumor types using a large diverse cohort of 5,715 histopathology samples, of which 2,988 had paired DNA methylation profiling and 848 had paired RNA-sequencing. We evaluated Neuropath-AI on another large independent multi-institutional cohort of 5,516 CNS tumors, for which Neuropath-AI predicted tumor class with an associated confidence score. Neuropath-AI designated 46% of test samples as predictable with high-confidence, which it then accuracy classified in 97% of samples. It made moderate-confidence (and above) predictions for 87% of test samples, for which it achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 80% for the top-1 prediction and 86% accuracy for a top-2 predictions. A comparison with human neuropathologists showed that Neuropath-AI is comparable at classifying tumors. A second test showed that human neuropathologists were more accurate when the Neuropath-AI classifier results were provided to them, testifying to the potential translational benefit of integrating AI classification tools into the pathologist’s workflow. Our model provides the basis for a clinically applicable deep learning assistant to improve human efficiency and accuracy of CNS tumor diagnosis. The model will be made publicly available and can be readily implemented to assist human pathologists in clinical workflows, in further expanded prospective studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207