ArticleCancers2022
Development of Training Materials for Pathologists to Provide Machine Learning Validation Data of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Automated scoring methods for quantitative interpretation of Tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis of computational tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer from the results of the TIGER challenge.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Supervised machine learning to quantitatively assess the prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Spatial architecture of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes adds predictive value beyond stromal TIL density for neoadjuvant response in triple-negative breast cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- AI-driven multi-omics integration in breast cancer: clinical applications, immunotherapy prediction, and translational challenges.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence and Medical Education (2013-2024): A Scopus-Based Bibliometric Analysis.The East African health research journal · 2025Article
- Prioritizing cases from a multi-institutional cohort for a dataset of pathologist annotations.Journal of pathology informatics · 2025Article
- Stromal lymphocytes are associated with upgrade of B3 breast lesions.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Training pathologists to assess stromal tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer synergises efforts in clinical care and scientific research.Histopathology · 2024Review
- Reproducible Reporting of the Collection and Evaluation of Annotations for Artificial Intelligence Models.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2024Article
- Initial interactions with the FDA on developing a validation dataset as a medical device development tool.The Journal of pathology · 2023Article
- Pilot study to evaluate tools to collect pathologist annotations for validating machine learning algorithms.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The High Throughput Truthing project aims to develop a dataset for validating artificial intelligence and machine learning models (AI/ML) fit for regulatory purposes. The context of this AI/ML validation dataset is the reporting of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) density evaluations in hematoxylin and eosin-stained invasive breast cancer biopsy specimens. After completing the pilot study, we found notable variability in the sTILs estimates as well as inconsistencies and gaps in the provided training to pathologists. Using the pilot study data and an expert panel, we created custom training materials to improve pathologist annotation quality for the pivotal study. We categorized regions of interest (ROIs) based on their mean sTILs density and selected ROIs with the highest and lowest sTILs variability. In a series of eight one-hour sessions, the expert panel reviewed each ROI and provided verbal density estimates and comments on features that confounded the sTILs evaluation. We aggregated and shaped the comments to identify pitfalls and instructions to improve our training materials. From these selected ROIs, we created a training set and proficiency test set to improve pathologist training with the goal to improve data collection for the pivotal study. We are not exploring AI/ML performance in this paper. Instead, we are creating materials that will train crowd-sourced pathologists to be the reference standard in a pivotal study to create an AI/ML model validation dataset. The issues discussed here are also important for clinicians to understand about the evaluation of sTILs in clinical practice and can provide insight to developers of AI/ML models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.