Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38881914›Full record

ReviewTranslational cancer research2024

Digital pathology, deep learning, and cancer: a narrative review.

Darnell K Adrian Williams, Gillian Graifman, Nowair Hussain, Maytal Amiel, Priscilla Tran, Arjun Reddy, Ali Haider, Bali Kumar Kavitesh, Austin Li, Leael Alishahian and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational cancer research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

16 authors.

Darnell K Adrian WilliamsMedical Scientist Training Program, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Gillian GraifmanNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Nowair HussainDepartment of Internal Medicine, Overlook Medical Center, Summit, NJ, USA.
Maytal AmielNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Priscilla TranNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Arjun ReddyApplied Mathematics & Statistics Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Ali HaiderDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA.
Bali Kumar KaviteshCentre for Frontier AI Research (CFAR), Agency for Science, Technology, and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore.
Austin LiNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Leael AlishahianNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Nichelle PereraNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Corey EfrosNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Myoungmee BabuArtificial Intelligence and Mathematics, New York City Department of Education, New York, NY, USA.
Mathew TharakanStonybrook Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Mill EtienneDepartment of Neurology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Benson A BabuNew York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1015-2393

Funding

Medical Scientist Training ProgramT32GM149364 · NIGMS · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI Myles H. Akabas · 2023 to 2026
$7.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM149364
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The emergence of digital pathology and deep learning technologies signifies a transformative era in healthcare. These technologies can enhance cancer detection, streamline operations, and bolster patient care. A substantial gap exists between the development phase of deep learning models in controlled laboratory environments and their translations into clinical practice. This narrative review evaluates the current landscape of deep learning and digital pathology, analyzing the factors influencing model development and implementation into clinical practice. Methods: We searched multiple databases, including Web of Science, Arxiv, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, Embase, PubMed, DBLP, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Semantic Scholar, and Cochrane, targeting articles on whole slide imaging and deep learning published from 2014 and 2023. Out of 776 articles identified based on inclusion criteria, we selected 36 papers for the analysis. Key Content and Findings: Most articles in this review focus on the in-laboratory phase of deep learning model development, a critical stage in the deep learning lifecycle. Challenges arise during model development and their integration into clinical practice. Notably, lab performance metrics may not always match real-world clinical outcomes. As technology advances and regulations evolve, we expect more clinical trials to bridge this performance gap and validate deep learning models' effectiveness in clinical care. High clinical accuracy is vital for informed decision-making throughout a patient's cancer care. Conclusions: Deep learning technology can enhance cancer detection, clinical workflows, and patient care. Challenges may arise during model development. The deep learning lifecycle involves data preprocessing, model development, and clinical implementation. Achieving health equity requires including diverse patient groups and eliminating bias during implementation. While model development is integral, most articles focus on the pre-deployment phase. Future longitudinal studies are crucial for validating models in real-world settings post-deployment. A collaborative approach among computational pathologists, technologists, industry, and healthcare providers is essential for driving adoption in clinical settings.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI)cancercomputational pathologydeep learning (DL)digital pathology (DP)

Identifiers

PMID38881914
PMCPMC11170525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.