ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2024
Digital Validation in Breast Cancer Needle Biopsies: Comparison of Histological Grade and Biomarker Expression Assessment Using Conventional Light Microscopy, Whole Slide Imaging, and Digital Image Analysis.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital transformation of pathology - the European Society of Pathology expert opinion paper.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Roche Digital Pathology Dx whole slide imaging system is comparable to traditional microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology.American journal of clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Dual Functions of Androgen Receptor Overexpression in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Complex Prognostic Marker.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Innovative approach for the qualitative-quantitative assessment of neurodevelopment biomarkers research in placenta tissue using immunohistochemistry digital image analysis.Biology methods & protocols · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Given the widespread use of whole slide imaging (WSI) for primary pathological diagnosis, we evaluated its utility in assessing histological grade and biomarker expression (ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67) compared to conventional light microscopy (CLM). In addition, we explored the utility of digital image analysis (DIA) for assessing biomarker expression. Three breast pathologists assessed the Nottingham combined histological grade, its components, and biomarker expression through the immunohistochemistry of core needle biopsy samples obtained from 101 patients with breast cancer using CLM, WSI, and DIA. There was no significant difference in variance between the WSI and CLM agreement rates for the Nottingham grade and its components and biomarker expression. Nuclear pleomorphism emerged as the most variable histologic component in intra- and inter-observer agreement (kappa ≤ 0.577 and kappa ≤ 0.394, respectively). The assessment of biomarker expression using DIA achieved an enhanced kappa compared to the inter-observer agreement. Compared to each observer's assessment, DIA exhibited an improved kappa coefficient for the expression of most biomarkers with CLM and WSI. Using WSI to assess prognostic and predictive factors, including histological grade and biomarker expression in breast cancer, is acceptable. Furthermore, incorporating DIA to assess biomarker expression shows promise for substantially enhancing scoring reproducibility.
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.