ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2026
PANDA-PLUS: Improved dataset of prostate whole slide images from PANDA Challenge with pixel-level expert annotations.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2026. 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.
- Whole-mount histopathology as spatial ground truth for artificial intelligence in prostate cancer: a structured narrative review of techniques, models, and translational gaps.American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI)-based prostate cancer detection through whole slide images (WSIs) offers promising potential to address the global pathologist shortage while improving clinical consistency. Digital slides and improving image analysis methods encourage the creation of tools to aid in WSI classification. Despite promising advances, these tools are still limited by available training data. Current publicly available datasets, such as Kaggle's PANDA Challenge, while large in scale, rely on slide-level labels that may introduce noise and limit model reliability. Others contain detailed annotations, but are smaller in size due to manual processing efforts. In this work, we introduce PANDA-PLUS, a 546-image dataset derived from PANDA images with improved pixel-level annotations, as well as an accompanying annotation pipeline that reduces pathologists' time commitment. We present a detailed comparative analysis between PANDA-PLUS and PANDA using Gleason score and ISUP grade, supported by agreement values, κ, and PABAK under multiple weighting schemes. The results demonstrate consistently lower grading in PANDA-PLUS, with disagreement patterns especially pronounced at higher grades. We also demonstrate through single rater grading of various annotation granularities how slide- and patch-level labels may distort grading proportions and alter image scores. PANDA-PLUS not only improves annotation granularity and reduces label noise but also exposes potential grading errors in the original PANDA dataset. We present PANDA-PLUS's annotations as an improved alternative to the PANDA labels and conclude that it represents a step forward in the development of higher-quality public datasets for clinical AI applications in prostate cancer pathology.
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.