Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27959886›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2017

Crowdsourcing for translational research: analysis of biomarker expression using cancer microarrays.

Jonathan Lawson, Rupesh J Robinson-Vyas, Janette P McQuillan, Andy Paterson, Sarah Christie, Matthew Kidza-Griffiths, Leigh-Anne McDuffus, Karwan A Moutasim, Emily C Shaw, Anne E Kiltie and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Scientific Discovery Games for Biomedical Research.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jonathan LawsonCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Rupesh J Robinson-VyasCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Janette P McQuillanCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Andy PatersonCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Sarah ChristieCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Matthew Kidza-GriffithsCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Leigh-Anne McDuffusCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK.
Karwan A MoutasimSouthampton CRUK Centre, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Tremona Road, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK.
Emily C ShawCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Anne E KiltieCRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
William J HowatCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK.
Andrew M HanbyCancer Research UK Leeds Centre, University of Leeds, Beckett Street, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Gareth J ThomasSouthampton CRUK Centre, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Tremona Road, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK.
Peter SmittenaarCancer Research UK, 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 23279
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcademic pathology suffers from an acute and growing lack of workforce resource. This especially impacts on translational elements of clinical trials, which can require detailed analysis of thousands of tissue samples. We tested whether crowdsourcing - enlisting help from the public - is a sufficiently accurate method to score such samples.

methodsWe developed a novel online interface to train and test lay participants on cancer detection and immunohistochemistry scoring in tissue microarrays. Lay participants initially performed cancer detection on lung cancer images stained for CD8, and we measured how extending a basic tutorial by annotated example images and feedback-based training affected cancer detection accuracy. We then applied this tutorial to additional cancer types and immunohistochemistry markers - bladder/ki67, lung/EGFR, and oesophageal/CD8 - to establish accuracy compared with experts. Using this optimised tutorial, we then tested lay participants' accuracy on immunohistochemistry scoring of lung/EGFR and bladder/p53 samples.

resultsWe observed that for cancer detection, annotated example images and feedback-based training both improved accuracy compared with a basic tutorial only. Using this optimised tutorial, we demonstrate highly accurate (>0.90 area under curve) detection of cancer in samples stained with nuclear, cytoplasmic and membrane cell markers. We also observed high Spearman correlations between lay participants and experts for immunohistochemistry scoring (0.91 (0.78, 0.96) and 0.97 (0.91, 0.99) for lung/EGFR and bladder/p53 samples, respectively).

conclusionsThese results establish crowdsourcing as a promising method to screen large data sets for biomarkers in cancer pathology research across a range of cancers and immunohistochemical stains.

Indexed as

Tissue Array AnalysisBiomarkers, TumorCrowdsourcingData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImmunohistochemistryNeoplasmsPatient SelectionTranslational Research, BiomedicalBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID27959886
PMCPMC5243992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.