Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38556922›Full record

ArticleHistopathology2024

Deceptive learning in histopathology.

Sahar Shahamatdar, Daryoush Saeed-Vafa, Drew Linsley, Farah Khalil, Katherine Lovinger, Lester Li, Howard T McLeod, Sohini Ramachandran, Thomas Serre

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Histopathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Sahar ShahamatdarCenter for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Daryoush Saeed-VafaDepartment of Anatomic Pathology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5010-0964
Drew LinsleyCarney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Farah KhalilDepartment of Anatomic Pathology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
Katherine LovingerDepartment of Molecular Biology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
Lester LiUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
Howard T McLeodIntermountain Precision Genomics, St George, UT, USA.
Sohini RamachandranCenter for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Thomas SerreCarney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Moffitt Cancer Center · USAllen Institute for Brain Science · USBrown University · USIntermountain Healthcare · USUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

Tracking and Evaluation CoreU54GM115677 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI SCHMID, CHRISTOPHER H. · 2016 to 2025
$45.0M
Population-genetic methods for inferring recent histories and targets of selection in the biobank eraR35GM139628 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI Sohini Ramachandran · 2021 to 2026
$2.2M
Novel statistical methods to localize genomic elements underlying adaptive evolutionR01GM118652 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI RAMACHANDRAN, SOHINI · 2016 to 2020
$1.6M
Brain Science Compute ClusterS10OD025181 · OD · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI SANES, JEROME N · 2019 to 2019
$600k
Brown UniversityMoffitt Cancer CenterNIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM118652NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM139628NIGMS NIH HHS R35GM139628NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM115677NIGMS NIH HHS U54GM115677NIH HHS R35GM139628NIH HHS S10 OD025181NIH HHS U54GM115677
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsDeep learning holds immense potential for histopathology, automating tasks that are simple for expert pathologists and revealing novel biology for tasks that were previously considered difficult or impossible to solve by eye alone. However, the extent to which the visual strategies learned by deep learning models in histopathological analysis are trustworthy or not has yet to be systematically analysed. Here, we systematically evaluate deep neural networks (DNNs) trained for histopathological analysis in order to understand if their learned strategies are trustworthy or deceptive. METHODS AND

resultsWe trained a variety of DNNs on a novel data set of 221 whole-slide images (WSIs) from lung adenocarcinoma patients, and evaluated their effectiveness at (1) molecular profiling of KRAS versus EGFR mutations, (2) determining the primary tissue of a tumour and (3) tumour detection. While DNNs achieved above-chance performance on molecular profiling, they did so by exploiting correlations between histological subtypes and mutations, and failed to generalise to a challenging test set obtained through laser capture microdissection (LCM). In contrast, DNNs learned robust and trustworthy strategies for determining the primary tissue of a tumour as well as detecting and localising tumours in tissue.

conclusionsOur work demonstrates that DNNs hold immense promise for aiding pathologists in analysing tissue. However, they are also capable of achieving seemingly strong performance by learning deceptive strategies that leverage spurious correlations, and are ultimately unsuitable for research or clinical work. The framework we propose for model evaluation and interpretation is an important step towards developing reliable automated systems for histopathological analysis.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma of LungDeep LearningLung NeoplasmsHumansMutationNeural Networks, Computercomputational pathologydeep learningexplainable artificial intelligenceKRASmolecular profiling

Identifiers

PMID38556922
PMCPMC11162337
OpenAlexW4393383729

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.