ArticleBiomolecules & biomedicine2025
A novel deep learning framework for automatic scoring of PD-L1 expression in non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- The Role of PD-L1 in Lung Cancer: From Biology to Clinical Application.ImmunoTargets and therapy · 2026Review
- Cross-Modality Learning for Predicting Immunohistochemistry Biomarkers from Hematoxylin and Eosin-Stained Whole Slide Images.The American journal of pathology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A critical predictive marker for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy is programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC). This paper explores a novel automated framework using deep learning to accurately evaluate PD-L1 expression from whole slide images (WSIs) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), aiming to improve the precision and consistency of Tumor Proportion Score (TPS) evaluation, which is essential for determining patient eligibility for immunotherapy. Automating TPS evaluation can enhance accuracy and consistency while reducing pathologists' workload. The proposed automated framework encompasses three stages: identifying tumor patches, segmenting tumor areas, and detecting cell nuclei within these areas, followed by estimating the TPS based on the ratio of positively stained to total viable tumor cells. This study utilized a Reference Medicine (Phoenix, Arizona) dataset containing 66 NSCLC tissue samples, adopting a hybrid human-machine approach for annotating extensive WSIs. Patches of size 1000x1000 pixels were generated to train classification models such as EfficientNet, Inception, and Vision Transformer models. Additionally, segmentation performance was evaluated across various UNet and DeepLabV3 architectures, and the pre-trained StarDist model was employed for nuclei detection, replacing traditional watershed techniques. PD-L1 expression was categorized into three levels based on TPS: negative expression (TPS < 1%), low expression (TPS 1-49%), and high expression (TPS ≥ 50%). The Vision Transformer-based model excelled in classification, achieving an F1-score of 97.54%, while the modified DeepLabV3+ model led in segmentation, attaining a Dice Similarity Coefficient of 83.47%. The TPS predicted by the framework closely correlated with the pathologist's TPS at 0.9635, and the framework's three-level classification F1-score was 93.89%. The proposed deep learning framework for automatically evaluating the TPS of PD-L1 expression in NSCLC demonstrated promising performance. This framework presents a potential tool that could produce clinically significant results more efficiently and cost-effectively.
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.