Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39285224›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2025

From whole-slide image to biomarker prediction: end-to-end weakly supervised deep learning in computational pathology.

Omar S M El Nahhas, Marko van Treeck, Georg Wölflein, Michaela Unger, Marta Ligero, Tim Lenz, Sophia J Wagner, Katherine J Hewitt, Firas Khader, Sebastian Foersch and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing 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

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Artificial intelligence predictsVeterinary pathology · 2026
    Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Omar S M El NahhasElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2542-2117
Marko van TreeckElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Georg WölfleinSchool of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0407-7617
Michaela UngerElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Marta LigeroElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Tim LenzElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Sophia J WagnerHelmholtz Munich-German Research Center for Environment and Health, Munich, Germany.
Katherine J HewittElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Firas KhaderStratifAI GmbH, Dresden, Germany.
Sebastian FoerschInstitute of Pathology-University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Daniel TruhnStratifAI GmbH, Dresden, Germany.
Jakob Nikolas KatherElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. jakob_nikolas.kather@tu-dresden.de.ORCID 0000-0002-3730-5348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hematoxylin- and eosin-stained whole-slide images (WSIs) are the foundation of diagnosis of cancer. In recent years, development of deep learning-based methods in computational pathology has enabled the prediction of biomarkers directly from WSIs. However, accurately linking tissue phenotype to biomarkers at scale remains a crucial challenge for democratizing complex biomarkers in precision oncology. This protocol describes a practical workflow for solid tumor associative modeling in pathology (STAMP), enabling prediction of biomarkers directly from WSIs by using deep learning. The STAMP workflow is biomarker agnostic and allows for genetic and clinicopathologic tabular data to be included as an additional input, together with histopathology images. The protocol consists of five main stages that have been successfully applied to various research problems: formal problem definition, data preprocessing, modeling, evaluation and clinical translation. The STAMP workflow differentiates itself through its focus on serving as a collaborative framework that can be used by clinicians and engineers alike for setting up research projects in the field of computational pathology. As an example task, we applied STAMP to the prediction of microsatellite instability (MSI) status in colorectal cancer, showing accurate performance for the identification of tumors high in MSI. Moreover, we provide an open-source code base, which has been deployed at several hospitals across the globe to set up computational pathology workflows. The STAMP workflow requires one workday of hands-on computational execution and basic command line knowledge.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDeep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedBiomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsHumansMicrosatellite InstabilitySupervised Machine LearningWorkflowBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.