Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42433310›Full record

ReviewJournal of pathology informatics2026

AI-based tumor cellularity assessment in digital pathology: A review of methods, datasets, and clinical translation.

Mehaboobathunnisa Sahul Hameed, Muhammad Kumail, Carole Dagher, Manal Abdulrahim, Massimo Pignatelli, Yacine Hadjiat

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pathology informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Mehaboobathunnisa Sahul HameedMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Muhammad KumailMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Carole DagherMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Manal AbdulrahimMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Massimo PignatelliMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Yacine HadjiatMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor cellularity (TC) is a key histopathological measure that impacts the quality of molecular testing and the choice of treatment. Estimation of TC is usually manual, by visual assessment by pathologists, which makes it prone to inter-observer variability. Advancements in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in digital pathology facilitate TC evaluation and scale up existing pathology workflows. In practical terms, these AI systems analyze digitized tissue slides computationally, producing objective TC scores that can support pathologists in determining whether a specimen contains sufficient tumor material for molecular testing. This review presents a compilation of AI-driven methodologies for TC estimation by summarizing publicly available datasets and benchmarking resources, examining methodological advancements in automated TC assessment, and delineating the research and commercial tools accessible for TC quantification. It also discusses the challenges that hinder clinical translation and the necessity for transparent and interpretable outputs that align with the pathologists' reasoning.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceAutomated tumor cellularity assessmentDigital pathologyTumor cellularityTumor scoring

Identifiers

PMID42433310
PMCPMC13352160

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.