ArticleArXiv2024
Impact of Stain Variation and Color Normalization for Prognostic Predictions in Pathology.
Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, deep neural networks (DNNs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in pathology applications, potentially even outperforming expert pathologists due to their ability to learn subtle features from large datasets. One complication in preparing digital pathology datasets for DNN tasks is variation in tinctorial qualities. A common way to address this is to perform stain normalization on the images. In this study, we show that a well-trained DNN model trained on one batch of histological slides failed to generalize to another batch prepared at a different time from the same tissue blocks, even when stain normalization methods were applied. This study used sample data from a previously reported DNN that was able to identify patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors did and did not metastasize, with high accuracy, based on training and then testing of digital images from H&E stained primary tumor tissue sections processed at the same time. In this study we obtained a new series of histologic slides from the adjacent recuts of same tissue blocks processed in the same lab but at a different time. We found that the DNN trained on the either batch of slides/images was unable to generalize and failed to predict progression in the other batch of slides/images (AUC
Identifiers
39314500PMC11419173What 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.