Automated quantification of measurable residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia using an artificial intelligence-assisted workflow

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Alexandre Bazinet, Alan Wang, Xinmei Li, Fuli Jia, Huan Mo, Wei Wang, Sa A. Wang
{"title":"Automated quantification of measurable residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia using an artificial intelligence-assisted workflow","authors":"Alexandre Bazinet,&nbsp;Alan Wang,&nbsp;Xinmei Li,&nbsp;Fuli Jia,&nbsp;Huan Mo,&nbsp;Wei Wang,&nbsp;Sa A. Wang","doi":"10.1002/cyto.b.22116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is an important prognostic marker. The most common CLL MRD method in current use is multiparameter flow cytometry, but availability is limited by the need for expert manual analysis. Automated analysis has the potential to expand access to CLL MRD testing. We evaluated the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) workflow for CLL MRD. We randomly selected 113 CLL MRD FCS files and divided them into training and validation sets. The training set (<i>n</i> = 41) was gated by expert manual analysis and used to train the AI model. We then compared the validation set (<i>n</i> = 72) MRD results obtained by the AI-assisted analysis versus those by expert manual analysis using the Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plot method. In the validation set, the AI-assisted analysis correctly categorized cases as MRD-negative versus MRD-positive in 96% of cases. When comparing the AI-assisted analysis versus the expert manual analysis, the Pearson <i>r</i> was 0.8650, mean bias was 0.2237 log<sub>10</sub> units, and the 95% limit of agreement (LOA) was ±1.0282 log<sub>10</sub> units. The AI-assisted analysis performed sub-optimally in atypical immunophenotype CLL and in cases lacking residual normal B cells. When excluding these outlier cases, the mean bias improved to 0.0680 log<sub>10</sub> units and the 95% LOA to ±0.2926 log<sub>10</sub> units. An automated AI-assisted workflow allows for the quantification of MRD in CLL with typical immunophenotype. Further work is required to improve performance in atypical immunophenotype CLL.</p>","PeriodicalId":10883,"journal":{"name":"Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cyto.b.22116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is an important prognostic marker. The most common CLL MRD method in current use is multiparameter flow cytometry, but availability is limited by the need for expert manual analysis. Automated analysis has the potential to expand access to CLL MRD testing. We evaluated the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) workflow for CLL MRD. We randomly selected 113 CLL MRD FCS files and divided them into training and validation sets. The training set (n = 41) was gated by expert manual analysis and used to train the AI model. We then compared the validation set (n = 72) MRD results obtained by the AI-assisted analysis versus those by expert manual analysis using the Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plot method. In the validation set, the AI-assisted analysis correctly categorized cases as MRD-negative versus MRD-positive in 96% of cases. When comparing the AI-assisted analysis versus the expert manual analysis, the Pearson r was 0.8650, mean bias was 0.2237 log10 units, and the 95% limit of agreement (LOA) was ±1.0282 log10 units. The AI-assisted analysis performed sub-optimally in atypical immunophenotype CLL and in cases lacking residual normal B cells. When excluding these outlier cases, the mean bias improved to 0.0680 log10 units and the 95% LOA to ±0.2926 log10 units. An automated AI-assisted workflow allows for the quantification of MRD in CLL with typical immunophenotype. Further work is required to improve performance in atypical immunophenotype CLL.

利用人工智能辅助工作流程自动量化慢性淋巴细胞白血病中的可测量残留疾病。
慢性淋巴细胞白血病(CLL)中可测量残留疾病(MRD)的检测是一个重要的预后指标。目前最常用的 CLL MRD 方法是多参数流式细胞术,但由于需要专家手动分析,因此可用性受到限制。自动分析有可能扩大 CLL MRD 检测的可及性。我们评估了人工智能(AI)辅助的多参数流式细胞术(MFC)工作流程在 CLL MRD 方面的性能。我们随机选取了113份CLL MRD FCS文件,将其分为训练集和验证集。训练集(n = 41)通过专家人工分析进行筛选,并用于训练人工智能模型。然后,我们使用皮尔逊相关系数和布兰德-阿尔特曼图法比较了人工智能辅助分析与专家人工分析得出的验证集(n = 72)MRD结果。在验证集中,人工智能辅助分析在96%的病例中正确地将病例分为MRD阴性和MRD阳性。将人工智能辅助分析与专家人工分析进行比较,皮尔逊r值为0.8650,平均偏差为0.2237 log10单位,95%的一致度(LOA)为±1.0282 log10单位。在非典型免疫表型 CLL 和缺乏残余正常 B 细胞的病例中,人工智能辅助分析的效果不理想。排除这些离群病例后,平均偏差降低到 0.0680 log10 单位,95% LOA 降低到 ±0.2926 log10 单位。自动化人工智能辅助工作流程可对具有典型免疫表型的CLL中的MRD进行量化。要提高非典型免疫表型CLL的性能,还需要进一步的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
32.40%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry features original research reports, in-depth reviews and special issues that directly relate to and palpably impact clinical flow, mass and image-based cytometry. These may include clinical and translational investigations important in the diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic management of patients. Thus, we welcome research papers from various disciplines related [but not limited to] hematopathologists, hematologists, immunologists and cell biologists with clinically relevant and innovative studies investigating individual-cell analytics and/or separations. In addition to the types of papers indicated above, we also welcome Letters to the Editor, describing case reports or important medical or technical topics relevant to our readership without the length and depth of a full original report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信