| 1. |
- Egevad, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Interobserver reproducibility of perineural invasion of prostatic adenocarcinoma in needle biopsies
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Virchows Archiv. - : Springer Nature. - 0945-6317 .- 1432-2307. ; 478:6, s. 1109-1116
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Numerous studies have shown a correlation between perineural invasion (PNI) in prostate biopsies and outcome. The reporting of PNI varies widely in the literature. While the interobserver variability of prostate cancer grading has been studied extensively, less is known regarding the reproducibility of PNI. A total of 212 biopsy cores from a population-based screening trial were included in this study (106 with and 106 without PNI according to the original pathology reports). The glass slides were scanned and circulated among four pathologists with a special interest in urological pathology for assessment of PNI. Discordant cases were stained by immunohistochemistry for S-100 protein. PNI was diagnosed by all four observers in 34.0% of cases, while 41.5% were considered to be negative for PNI. In 24.5% of cases, there was a disagreement between the observers. The kappa for interobserver variability was 0.67-0.75 (mean 0.73). The observations from one participant were compared with data from the original reports, and a kappa for intraobserver variability of 0.87 was achieved. Based on immunohistochemical findings among discordant cases, 88.6% had PNI while 11.4% did not. The most common diagnostic pitfall was the presence of bundles of stroma or smooth muscle. It was noted in a few cases that collagenous micronodules could be mistaken for a nerve. The distance between cancer and nerve was another cause of disagreement. Although the results suggest that the reproducibility of PNI may be greater than that of prostate cancer grading, there is still a need for improvement and standardization.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kartasalo, Kimmo, et al.
(författare)
-
Artificial Intelligence for Diagnosis and Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer in Biopsies-Current Status and Next Steps
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Urology Focus. - : Elsevier. - 2405-4569. ; 7:4, s. 687-691
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer in biopsies are critical for the clinical management of men with prostate cancer. Despite this, the high grading variability among pathologists leads to the potential for under-and overtreatment. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have shown promise in assisting pathologists to perform Gleason grading, which could help address this problem. In this mini-review, we highlight studies reporting on the development of AI systems for cancer detection and Gleason grading, and discuss the progress needed for widespread clinical implementation, as well as anticipated future developments. Patient summary: This mini-review summarizes the evidence relating to the validation of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted cancer detection and Gleason grading of prostate cancer in biopsies, and highlights the remaining steps required prior to its widespread clinical implementation. We found that, although there is strong evidence to show that AI is able to perform Gleason grading on par with experienced uropathologists, more work is needed to ensure the accuracy of results from AI systems in diverse settings across different patient populations, digitization platforms, and pathology laboratories.
|
|
| 3. |
- Olsson, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Estimating diagnostic uncertainty in artificial intelligence assisted pathology using conformal prediction
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Nature Communications. - : Springer Nature. - 2041-1723. ; 13:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Unreliable predictions can occur when an artificial intelligence (AI) system is presented with data it has not been exposed to during training. We demonstrate the use of conformal prediction to detect unreliable predictions, using histopathological diagnosis and grading of prostate biopsies as example. We digitized 7788 prostate biopsies from 1192 men in the STHLM3 diagnostic study, used for training, and 3059 biopsies from 676 men used for testing. With conformal prediction, 1 in 794 (0.1%) predictions is incorrect for cancer diagnosis (compared to 14 errors [2%] without conformal prediction) while 175 (22%) of the predictions are flagged as unreliable when the AI-system is presented with new data from the same lab and scanner that it was trained on. Conformal prediction could with small samples (N = 49 for external scanner, N = 10 for external lab and scanner, and N = 12 for external lab, scanner and pathology assessment) detect systematic differences in external data leading to worse predictive performance. The AI-system with conformal prediction commits 3 (2%) errors for cancer detection in cases of atypical prostate tissue compared to 44 (25%) without conformal prediction, while the system flags 143 (80%) unreliable predictions. We conclude that conformal prediction can increase patient safety of AI-systems.
|
|
| 4. |
- Strom, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and grading of prostate cancer in biopsies : a population-based, diagnostic study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 21:2, s. 222-232
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundAn increasing volume of prostate biopsies and a worldwide shortage of urological pathologists puts a strain on pathology departments. Additionally, the high intra-observer and inter-observer variability in grading can result in overtreatment and undertreatment of prostate cancer. To alleviate these problems, we aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) system with clinically acceptable accuracy for prostate cancer detection, localisation, and Gleason grading.MethodsWe digitised 6682 slides from needle core biopsies from 976 randomly selected participants aged 50–69 in the Swedish prospective and population-based STHLM3 diagnostic study done between May 28, 2012, and Dec 30, 2014 (ISRCTN84445406), and another 271 from 93 men from outside the study. The resulting images were used to train deep neural networks for assessment of prostate biopsies. The networks were evaluated by predicting the presence, extent, and Gleason grade of malignant tissue for an independent test dataset comprising 1631 biopsies from 246 men from STHLM3 and an external validation dataset of 330 biopsies from 73 men. We also evaluated grading performance on 87 biopsies individually graded by 23 experienced urological pathologists from the International Society of Urological Pathology. We assessed discriminatory performance by receiver operating characteristics and tumour extent predictions by correlating predicted cancer length against measurements by the reporting pathologist. We quantified the concordance between grades assigned by the AI system and the expert urological pathologists using Cohen's kappa.FindingsThe AI achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0·997 (95% CI 0·994–0·999) for distinguishing between benign (n=910) and malignant (n=721) biopsy cores on the independent test dataset and 0·986 (0·972–0·996) on the external validation dataset (benign n=108, malignant n=222). The correlation between cancer length predicted by the AI and assigned by the reporting pathologist was 0·96 (95% CI 0·95–0·97) for the independent test dataset and 0·87 (0·84–0·90) for the external validation dataset. For assigning Gleason grades, the AI achieved a mean pairwise kappa of 0·62, which was within the range of the corresponding values for the expert pathologists (0·60–0·73).InterpretationAn AI system can be trained to detect and grade cancer in prostate needle biopsy samples at a ranking comparable to that of international experts in prostate pathology. Clinical application could reduce pathology workload by reducing the assessment of benign biopsies and by automating the task of measuring cancer length in positive biopsy cores. An AI system with expert-level grading performance might contribute a second opinion, aid in standardising grading, and provide pathology expertise in parts of the world where it does not exist.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ström, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Pathologist-Level Grading of Prostate Biospies with Artificial intelligence
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: An increasing volume of prostate biopsies and a world-wide shortage of uro-pathologists puts a strain on pathology departments. Additionally, the high intra- and inter-observer variability in grading can result in over- and undertreatment of prostate cancer. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods may alleviate these problems by assisting pathologists to reduce workload and harmonize grading. Methods: We digitized 6,682 needle biopsies from 976 participants in the population based STHLM3 diagnostic study to train deep neural networks for assessing prostate biopsies. The networks were evaluated by predicting the presence, extent, and Gleason grade of malignant tissue for an independent test set comprising 1,631 biopsies from 245 men. We additionally evaluated grading performance on 87 biopsies individually graded by 23 experienced urological pathologists from the International Society of Urological Pathology. We assessed discriminatory performance by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and tumor extent predictions by correlating predicted millimeter cancer length against measurements by the reporting pathologist. We quantified the concordance between grades assigned by the AI and the expert urological pathologists using Cohen's kappa. Results: The performance of the AI to detect and grade cancer in prostate needle biopsy samples was comparable to that of international experts in prostate pathology. The AI achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.997 for distinguishing between benign and malignant biopsy cores, and 0.999 for distinguishing between men with or without prostate cancer. The correlation between millimeter cancer predicted by the AI and assigned by the reporting pathologist was 0.96. For assigning Gleason grades, the AI achieved an average pairwise kappa of 0.62. This was within the range of the corresponding values for the expert pathologists (0.60 to 0.73).
|
|
