Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33903728›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2021

Multi-magnification-based machine learning as an ancillary tool for the pathologic assessment of shaved margins for breast carcinoma lumpectomy specimens.

Timothy M D'Alfonso, David Joon Ho, Matthew G Hanna, Anne Grabenstetter, Dig Vijay Kumar Yarlagadda, Luke Geneslaw, Peter Ntiamoah, Thomas J Fuchs, Lee K Tan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Ki-67 assessment of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: Systematic review and meta-analysis of manual vs. digital pathology scoring.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Timothy M D'AlfonsoDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. dalfonst@mskcc.org.ORCID 0000-0003-0464-0868
David Joon HoDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9124-884X
Matthew G HannaDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Anne GrabenstetterDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8419-6167
Dig Vijay Kumar YarlagaddaDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Luke GeneslawDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6862-9102
Peter NtiamoahDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Thomas J FuchsDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Lee K TanDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The surgical margin status of breast lumpectomy specimens for invasive carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) guides clinical decisions, as positive margins are associated with higher rates of local recurrence. The "cavity shave" method of margin assessment has the benefits of allowing the surgeon to orient shaved margins intraoperatively and the pathologist to assess one inked margin per specimen. We studied whether a deep convolutional neural network, a deep multi-magnification network (DMMN), could accurately segment carcinoma from benign tissue in whole slide images (WSIs) of shave margin slides, and therefore serve as a potential screening tool to improve the efficiency of microscopic evaluation of these specimens. Applying the pretrained DMMN model, or the initial model, to a validation set of 408 WSIs (348 benign, 60 with carcinoma) achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.941. After additional manual annotations and fine-tuning of the model, the updated model achieved an AUC of 0.968 with sensitivity set at 100% and corresponding specificity of 78%. We applied the initial model and updated model to a testing set of 427 WSIs (374 benign, 53 with carcinoma) which showed AUC values of 0.900 and 0.927, respectively. Using the pixel classification threshold selected from the validation set, the model achieved a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 78%. The four false-negative classifications resulted from two small foci of DCIS (1 mm, 0.5 mm) and two foci of well-differentiated invasive carcinoma (3 mm, 1.5 mm). This proof-of-principle study demonstrates that a DMMN machine learning model can segment invasive carcinoma and DCIS in surgical margin specimens with high accuracy and has the potential to be used as a screening tool for pathologic assessment of these specimens.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMargins of ExcisionBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMastectomy, SegmentalNeoplasm, Residual

Identifiers

PMID33903728
PMCPMC9906995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.