ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2024
Towards interactive AI-authoring with prototypical few-shot classifiers in histopathology.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on: "Artificial Intelligence Can Facilitate Application of Risk Stratification Algorithms to Bladder Cancer Patient Case Scenarios".Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A vast multitude of tasks in histopathology could potentially benefit from the support of artificial intelligence (AI). Many examples have been shown in the literature and first commercial products with FDA or CE-IVDR clearance are available. However, two key challenges remain: (1) a scarcity of thoroughly annotated images, respectively the laboriousness of this task, and (2) the creation of robust models that can cope with the data heterogeneity in the field (domain generalization). In this work, we investigate how the combination of prototypical few-shot classification models and data augmentation can address both of these challenges. Based on annotated data sets that include multiple centers, multiple scanners, and two tumor entities, we examine the robustness and the adaptability of few-shot classifiers in multiple scenarios. We demonstrate that data from one scanner and one site are sufficient to train robust few-shot classification models by applying domain-specific data augmentation. The models achieved classification performance of around 90% on a multiscanner and multicenter database, which is on par with the accuracy achieved on the primary single-center single-scanner data. Various convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures can be used for feature extraction in the few-shot model. A comparison of nine state-of-the-art architectures yielded that EfficientNet B0 provides the best trade-off between accuracy and inference time. The classification of prototypical few-shot models directly relies on class prototypes derived from example images of each class. Therefore, we investigated the influence of prototypes originating from images from different scanners and evaluated their performance also on the multiscanner database. Again, our few-shot model showed a stable performance with an average absolute deviation in accuracy compared to the primary prototypes of 1.8% points. Finally, we examined the adaptability to a new tumor entity: classification of tissue sections containing urothelial carcinoma into normal, tumor, and necrotic regions. Only three annotations per subclass (e.g., muscle and adipose tissue are subclasses of normal tissue) were provided to adapt the few-shot model, which obtained an overall accuracy of 93.6%. These results demonstrate that prototypical few-shot classification is an ideal technology for realizing an interactive AI authoring system as it only requires few annotations and can be adapted to new tasks without involving retraining of the underlying feature extraction CNN, which would in turn require a selection of hyper-parameters based on data science expert knowledge. Similarly, it can be regarded as a guided annotation system. To this end, we realized a workflow and user interface that targets non-technical users.
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.