Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40746941›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2025

Automated determination of tumor cell percentages in whole slide images: A nuclear classification study for molecular pathology tests.

Yunus Baran Kök, Işın Doğan Ekici, Ümit İnce

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [The problem of determining tumor cell content].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Yunus Baran KökAcıbadem University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Işın Doğan EkiciAcıbadem University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Ümit İnceAcıbadem University, Istanbul, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Calculation of tumor cell percentage, a critical pre-analytical component in molecular pathology, is typically performed by pathologists estimating a ratio. This semiquantitative approach can lead to inter-observer variability, potentially adversely affecting patient management and treatment outcomes. In era of digital pathology, it became crucial to automate such assessments for more objective approach. This study aims to contribute to this process by developing a model for automated calculation of tumor cell percentage in high-grade serous carcinomas. Tumor containing hematoxylin-eosin slides from 100 patients were divided into training, validation, and test groups. Slides were digitalized and placed in QuPath platform. Image patches were obtained from WSIs of training and validation sets, and were stitched together to form digital microarrays by using ImageJ extension. Subsequently, nuclear detection and segmentation were performed using StarDist software, and tumor and non-tumor cell nuclei were classified using annotations. For binary classifier, random forest algorithm was selected. With hyperparameter tuning, many pre-models were assessed by cross-validation and most suitable pre-model was selected to apply to test set. Testing was performed on WSIs and criterion standard was based on corresponding immunohistochemistry (p53 or PAX8) slides which showed diffuse positivitity for tumor cells. Performance of model was measured using regression metrics. This study is designed to perform and assess a classifier in whole slide images to reflect real-world experience.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDigital pathologyMachine learningMolecular pathologyRandom forestTumor cell percentageWhole slide image

Identifiers

PMID40746941
PMCPMC12312104

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.