人工智能辅助乳腺癌 HER2 免疫组化评估:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 PATHOLOGY
{"title":"人工智能辅助乳腺癌 HER2 免疫组化评估:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.prp.2024.155472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Accurate assessment of HER2 expression in tumor tissue is crucial for determining HER2-targeted treatment options. Nevertheless, pathologists' assessments of HER2 status are less objective than automated, computer-based evaluations. Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises enhanced accuracy and reproducibility in HER2 interpretation. This study aimed to systematically evaluate current AI algorithms for HER2 immunohistochemical diagnosis, offering insights to guide the development of more adaptable algorithms in response to evolving HER2 assessment practices. A comprehensive data search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted using a combination of subject terms and free text. A total of 4994 computational pathology articles published from inception to September 2023 identifying HER2 expression in breast cancer were retrieved. After applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, seven studies were selected. These seven studies comprised 6867 HER2 identification tasks, with two studies employing the HER2-CONNECT algorithm, two using the CNN algorithm, one with the multi-class logistic regression algorithm, and two using the HER2 4B5 algorithm. AI's sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing HER2 0/1+ were 0.98 [0.92–0.99] and 0.92 [0.80–0.97] respectively. For distinguishing HER2 2+, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 [0.50–0.92] and 0.98 [0.93–0.99], respectively. For HER2 3+ distinction, AI exhibited a sensitivity of 0.99 [0.98–1.00] and specificity of 0.99 [0.97–1.00]. Furthermore, due to the lack of HER2-targeted therapies for HER2-negative patients in the past, pathologists may have neglected to distinguish between HER2 0 and 1+, leaving room for improvement in the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in this differentiation. AI excels in automating the assessment of HER2 immunohistochemistry, showing promising results despite slight variations in performance across different HER2 status. While incorporating AI algorithms into the pathology workflow for HER2 assessment poses challenges in standardization, application patterns, and ethical considerations, ongoing advancements suggest its potential as a widely effective tool for pathologists in clinical practice in the near future.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19916,"journal":{"name":"Pathology, research and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence for assisted HER2 immunohistochemistry evaluation of breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prp.2024.155472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Accurate assessment of HER2 expression in tumor tissue is crucial for determining HER2-targeted treatment options. Nevertheless, pathologists' assessments of HER2 status are less objective than automated, computer-based evaluations. Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises enhanced accuracy and reproducibility in HER2 interpretation. This study aimed to systematically evaluate current AI algorithms for HER2 immunohistochemical diagnosis, offering insights to guide the development of more adaptable algorithms in response to evolving HER2 assessment practices. A comprehensive data search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted using a combination of subject terms and free text. A total of 4994 computational pathology articles published from inception to September 2023 identifying HER2 expression in breast cancer were retrieved. After applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, seven studies were selected. These seven studies comprised 6867 HER2 identification tasks, with two studies employing the HER2-CONNECT algorithm, two using the CNN algorithm, one with the multi-class logistic regression algorithm, and two using the HER2 4B5 algorithm. AI's sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing HER2 0/1+ were 0.98 [0.92–0.99] and 0.92 [0.80–0.97] respectively. For distinguishing HER2 2+, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 [0.50–0.92] and 0.98 [0.93–0.99], respectively. For HER2 3+ distinction, AI exhibited a sensitivity of 0.99 [0.98–1.00] and specificity of 0.99 [0.97–1.00]. Furthermore, due to the lack of HER2-targeted therapies for HER2-negative patients in the past, pathologists may have neglected to distinguish between HER2 0 and 1+, leaving room for improvement in the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in this differentiation. AI excels in automating the assessment of HER2 immunohistochemistry, showing promising results despite slight variations in performance across different HER2 status. While incorporating AI algorithms into the pathology workflow for HER2 assessment poses challenges in standardization, application patterns, and ethical considerations, ongoing advancements suggest its potential as a widely effective tool for pathologists in clinical practice in the near future.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pathology, research and practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pathology, research and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0344033824003832\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathology, research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0344033824003832","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

准确评估肿瘤组织中 HER2 的表达对于确定 HER2 靶向治疗方案至关重要。然而,与基于计算机的自动评估相比,病理学家对 HER2 状态的评估不够客观。人工智能(AI)有望提高HER2解读的准确性和可重复性。本研究旨在系统评估目前用于HER2免疫组化诊断的人工智能算法,为开发适应性更强的算法提供指导,以应对不断发展的HER2评估实践。我们使用主题词和自由文本相结合的方法,对 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 和 Web of Science 数据库进行了全面的数据检索。共检索到 4994 篇从开始到 2023 年 9 月发表的计算病理学文章,这些文章都确定了乳腺癌中 HER2 的表达。采用预定义的纳入和排除标准后,选出了七项研究。这七项研究包含 6867 项 HER2 识别任务,其中两项研究采用 HER2-CONNECT 算法,两项采用 CNN 算法,一项采用多类逻辑回归算法,两项采用 HER2 4B5 算法。人工智能识别 HER2 0/1+ 的灵敏度和特异度分别为 0.98 [0.92-0.99] 和 0.92 [0.80-0.97]。区分 HER2 2+ 的灵敏度和特异性分别为 0.78 [0.50-0.92] 和 0.98 [0.93-0.99]。对于 HER2 3+ 的区分,AI 的灵敏度为 0.99 [0.98-1.00],特异性为 0.99 [0.97-1.00]。此外,由于过去缺乏针对 HER2 阴性患者的 HER2 靶向疗法,病理学家可能忽略了对 HER2 0 和 1+ 的区分,因此人工智能(AI)在这一区分方面的性能还有待提高。人工智能在自动评估 HER2 免疫组化方面表现出色,尽管在不同的 HER2 状态下表现略有不同,但仍显示出良好的效果。虽然将人工智能算法纳入病理工作流程进行 HER2 评估在标准化、应用模式和伦理考虑方面存在挑战,但不断取得的进步表明,在不久的将来,人工智能有可能成为病理学家在临床实践中广泛使用的有效工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial intelligence for assisted HER2 immunohistochemistry evaluation of breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Accurate assessment of HER2 expression in tumor tissue is crucial for determining HER2-targeted treatment options. Nevertheless, pathologists' assessments of HER2 status are less objective than automated, computer-based evaluations. Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises enhanced accuracy and reproducibility in HER2 interpretation. This study aimed to systematically evaluate current AI algorithms for HER2 immunohistochemical diagnosis, offering insights to guide the development of more adaptable algorithms in response to evolving HER2 assessment practices. A comprehensive data search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted using a combination of subject terms and free text. A total of 4994 computational pathology articles published from inception to September 2023 identifying HER2 expression in breast cancer were retrieved. After applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, seven studies were selected. These seven studies comprised 6867 HER2 identification tasks, with two studies employing the HER2-CONNECT algorithm, two using the CNN algorithm, one with the multi-class logistic regression algorithm, and two using the HER2 4B5 algorithm. AI's sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing HER2 0/1+ were 0.98 [0.92–0.99] and 0.92 [0.80–0.97] respectively. For distinguishing HER2 2+, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 [0.50–0.92] and 0.98 [0.93–0.99], respectively. For HER2 3+ distinction, AI exhibited a sensitivity of 0.99 [0.98–1.00] and specificity of 0.99 [0.97–1.00]. Furthermore, due to the lack of HER2-targeted therapies for HER2-negative patients in the past, pathologists may have neglected to distinguish between HER2 0 and 1+, leaving room for improvement in the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in this differentiation. AI excels in automating the assessment of HER2 immunohistochemistry, showing promising results despite slight variations in performance across different HER2 status. While incorporating AI algorithms into the pathology workflow for HER2 assessment poses challenges in standardization, application patterns, and ethical considerations, ongoing advancements suggest its potential as a widely effective tool for pathologists in clinical practice in the near future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
405
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: Pathology, Research and Practice provides accessible coverage of the most recent developments across the entire field of pathology: Reviews focus on recent progress in pathology, while Comments look at interesting current problems and at hypotheses for future developments in pathology. Original Papers present novel findings on all aspects of general, anatomic and molecular pathology. Rapid Communications inform readers on preliminary findings that may be relevant for further studies and need to be communicated quickly. Teaching Cases look at new aspects or special diagnostic problems of diseases and at case reports relevant for the pathologist''s practice.
×
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