Mycophenolate mofetil-induced colitis versus colonic graft-versus-host disease: a comparative histologic study with artificial intelligence model development.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q2 CELL BIOLOGY
Histopathology Pub Date : 2025-07-24 DOI:10.1111/his.15521
Rofyda Elhalaby, Priyadharshini Sivasubramaniam, Benjamin J Van Treeck, Lindsey Smith, Nadarra Stokes, Won-Tak Choi, Huaibin Mabel Ko, Roger K Moreira, Christopher P Hartley, Catherine E Hagen
{"title":"Mycophenolate mofetil-induced colitis versus colonic graft-versus-host disease: a comparative histologic study with artificial intelligence model development.","authors":"Rofyda Elhalaby, Priyadharshini Sivasubramaniam, Benjamin J Van Treeck, Lindsey Smith, Nadarra Stokes, Won-Tak Choi, Huaibin Mabel Ko, Roger K Moreira, Christopher P Hartley, Catherine E Hagen","doi":"10.1111/his.15521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the histopathologic features of MMF-induced colitis and colonic GVHD and develop a digital tool using deep learning convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to semi-automate the quantification of eosinophils.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MMF and GVHD colitis cases were retrieved. A cohort of transplant patients who were at risk for developing GVHD and were on MMF at the time of biopsy was also identified. Cases were reviewed for histologic features and a deep learning CNN was trained to quantify lamina propria eosinophils. Clinical history was collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-five patients were included in the study group: GVHD (n = 37), MMF (n = 25) and GVHD vs. MMF (n = 33). Within the GVHD vs. MMF group, one patient was thought to have definitive MMF colitis and one possible MMF colitis. The GVHD group had a significantly higher apoptotic count compared to the MMF group (median: 7 vs. 2, P = 0.03). Neuroendocrine aggregates were present in the GVHD (N = 12) and GVHD vs. MMF (N = 4) groups while absent in the MMF group. The MMF group had a higher semi-quantitative eosinophil score and a higher automated eosinophil count as detected by the deep learning CNN (median eos/HPF: MMF 19.2, GVHD vs. MMF 3.6, GVHD 3.4, P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lower eosinophil counts, higher apoptotic counts and neuroendocrine cell aggregates favour the diagnosis of GVHD. AI models for eosinophil quantification may serve as an ancillary tool for assessing this differential diagnosis. Given the rarity of MMF-induced colitis in SCT patients, pathologists should have a high threshold for making this diagnosis in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":13219,"journal":{"name":"Histopathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Histopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/his.15521","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the histopathologic features of MMF-induced colitis and colonic GVHD and develop a digital tool using deep learning convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to semi-automate the quantification of eosinophils.

Methods: MMF and GVHD colitis cases were retrieved. A cohort of transplant patients who were at risk for developing GVHD and were on MMF at the time of biopsy was also identified. Cases were reviewed for histologic features and a deep learning CNN was trained to quantify lamina propria eosinophils. Clinical history was collected.

Results: Ninety-five patients were included in the study group: GVHD (n = 37), MMF (n = 25) and GVHD vs. MMF (n = 33). Within the GVHD vs. MMF group, one patient was thought to have definitive MMF colitis and one possible MMF colitis. The GVHD group had a significantly higher apoptotic count compared to the MMF group (median: 7 vs. 2, P = 0.03). Neuroendocrine aggregates were present in the GVHD (N = 12) and GVHD vs. MMF (N = 4) groups while absent in the MMF group. The MMF group had a higher semi-quantitative eosinophil score and a higher automated eosinophil count as detected by the deep learning CNN (median eos/HPF: MMF 19.2, GVHD vs. MMF 3.6, GVHD 3.4, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Lower eosinophil counts, higher apoptotic counts and neuroendocrine cell aggregates favour the diagnosis of GVHD. AI models for eosinophil quantification may serve as an ancillary tool for assessing this differential diagnosis. Given the rarity of MMF-induced colitis in SCT patients, pathologists should have a high threshold for making this diagnosis in this population.

霉酚酸酯诱导的结肠炎与结肠移植物抗宿主病:与人工智能模型开发的比较组织学研究
目的:本研究的目的是比较mmf诱导的结肠炎和结肠GVHD的组织病理学特征,并开发一种使用深度学习卷积神经网络(cnn)的数字工具来半自动量化嗜酸性粒细胞。方法:检索MMF和GVHD结肠炎病例。一组移植患者在活检时接受MMF治疗,有发生GVHD的风险。回顾病例的组织学特征,并训练深度学习CNN来量化固有层嗜酸性粒细胞。收集临床病史。结果:95例患者被纳入研究组:GVHD (n = 37), MMF (n = 25)和GVHD vs MMF (n = 33)。在GVHD与MMF组中,一名患者被认为患有明确的MMF结肠炎,另一名患者被认为可能患有MMF结肠炎。GVHD组的细胞凋亡计数明显高于MMF组(中位数:7比2,P = 0.03)。神经内分泌聚集物在GVHD组(N = 12)和GVHD vs. MMF组(N = 4)中存在,而在MMF组中不存在。通过深度学习CNN检测,MMF组具有更高的半定量嗜酸性粒细胞评分和更高的自动嗜酸性粒细胞计数(中位eos/HPF: MMF 19.2, GVHD vs. MMF 3.6, GVHD 3.4, P)。结论:较低的嗜酸性粒细胞计数,较高的凋亡计数和神经内分泌细胞聚集有利于GVHD的诊断。用于嗜酸性粒细胞定量的人工智能模型可以作为评估这种鉴别诊断的辅助工具。鉴于mmf引起的结肠炎在SCT患者中的罕见性,病理学家在这一人群中做出这种诊断应该有很高的阈值。
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
Histopathology
Histopathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
4.70%
发文量
239
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Histopathology is an international journal intended to be of practical value to surgical and diagnostic histopathologists, and to investigators of human disease who employ histopathological methods. Our primary purpose is to publish advances in pathology, in particular those applicable to clinical practice and contributing to the better understanding of human disease.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信