Suppr超能文献

免疫评分(自动化数字病理学)与病理学家视觉评分在结肠癌免疫反应评估中的比较

Comparison of Immune Response Assessment in Colon Cancer by Immunoscore (Automated Digital Pathology) and Pathologist Visual Scoring.

作者信息

Boquet Isabelle, Kassambara Alboukadel, Lui Alfred, Tanner Alicia, Latil Marie, Lovera Yoann, Arnoux Fanny, Hermitte Fabienne, Galon Jérôme, Catteau Aurelie

机构信息

Veracyte, 13288 Marseille, France.

Innovative Pathology Medical Group, Torrance, CA 90503, USA.

出版信息

Cancers (Basel). 2022 Feb 24;14(5):1170. doi: 10.3390/cancers14051170.

Abstract

Adjunction of immune response into the TNM classification system improves the prediction of colon cancer (CC) prognosis. However, immune response measurements have not been used as robust biomarkers of pathology in clinical practice until the introduction of Immunoscore (IS), a standardized assay based on automated artificial intelligence assisted digital pathology. The strong prognostic impact of the immune response, as assessed by IS, has been widely validated and IS can help to refine treatment decision making in early CC. In this study, we compared pathologist visual scoring to IS. Four pathologists evaluated tumor specimens from 50 early-stage CC patients and classified the CD3+ and CD8+ T-cell densities at the tumor site (T-score) into 2 (High/Low) categories. Individual and overall pathologist scoring of immune response (before and after training for immune response assessment) were compared to the reference IS (High/Low). Pathologists' disagreement with the reference IS was observed in almost half of the cases (48%) and training only slightly improved the accuracy of pathologists' classification. Agreement among pathologists was minimal with a Kappa of 0.34 and 0.57 before and after training, respectively. The standardized IS assay outperformed expert pathologist assessment in the clinical setting.

摘要

将免疫反应纳入TNM分类系统可改善结肠癌(CC)预后的预测。然而,在引入免疫评分(IS)之前,免疫反应测量在临床实践中尚未被用作可靠的病理学生物标志物,IS是一种基于人工智能辅助数字病理学自动化的标准化检测方法。通过IS评估的免疫反应的强大预后影响已得到广泛验证,并且IS有助于优化早期CC的治疗决策。在本研究中,我们将病理学家的视觉评分与IS进行了比较。四位病理学家评估了50例早期CC患者的肿瘤标本,并将肿瘤部位的CD3 +和CD8 + T细胞密度(T评分)分为2类(高/低)。将免疫反应的个体和总体病理学家评分(在进行免疫反应评估培训之前和之后)与参考IS(高/低)进行比较。在几乎一半的病例(48%)中观察到病理学家与参考IS存在分歧,并且培训仅略微提高了病理学家分类的准确性。病理学家之间的一致性极小,培训前后的Kappa值分别为0.34和0.57。在临床环境中,标准化的IS检测优于专家病理学家的评估。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/465a/8909354/bd8fd38ec2b0/cancers-14-01170-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验