人工智能支持的组织学在评估溃疡性结肠炎的组织学缓解方面表现出与病理学家相当的准确性:系统回顾、荟萃分析和荟萃回归。

Miguel Puga-Tejada, Snehali Majumder, Yasuharu Maeda, Irene Zammarchi, Ilaria Ditonno, Giovanni Santacroce, Ivan Capobianco, Carlos Robles-Medranda, Subrata Ghosh, Marietta Iacucci
{"title":"人工智能支持的组织学在评估溃疡性结肠炎的组织学缓解方面表现出与病理学家相当的准确性:系统回顾、荟萃分析和荟萃回归。","authors":"Miguel Puga-Tejada, Snehali Majumder, Yasuharu Maeda, Irene Zammarchi, Ilaria Ditonno, Giovanni Santacroce, Ivan Capobianco, Carlos Robles-Medranda, Subrata Ghosh, Marietta Iacucci","doi":"10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Achieving histological remission is a desirable emerging treatment target in ulcerative colitis (UC), yet its assessment is challenging due to high inter- and intraobserver variability, reliance on experts, and lack of standardization. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise in addressing these issues. This systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression evaluated the AI's performance in assessing histological remission and compared it with that of pathologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline/PubMed and Scopus databases from inception to September 2024. We included studies on AI models assessing histological activity in UC, with or without comparison to pathologists. Pooled performance metrics were calculated: sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), observed agreement, and F1 score. A pairwise meta-analysis compared AI and pathologists, while sub-meta-analysis and meta-regression evaluated heterogeneity and factors influencing AI performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. AI models exhibited strong performance with a pooled sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88), specificity 0.87 (0.84-0.91), PPV 0.90 (0.87-0.92), NPV 0.80 (0.71-0.88), observed agreement 0.85 (0.82-0.89), and F1 score 0.85 (0.82-0.89). AI models demonstrated no significant differences with pathologists for specificity, observed agreement, and F1 score, while they were outperformed by pathologists for sensitivity and NPV. AI models for the adult population were linked to reduced heterogeneity and enhanced AI performance at meta-regression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI shows significant potential for assessing histological remission in UC and performs comparably to pathologists. Future research should focus on standardized, large-scale studies to minimize heterogeneity and support widespread AI implementation in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":94074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Crohn's & colitis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence-enabled histology exhibits comparable accuracy to pathologists in assessing histological remission in ulcerative colitis: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Puga-Tejada, Snehali Majumder, Yasuharu Maeda, Irene Zammarchi, Ilaria Ditonno, Giovanni Santacroce, Ivan Capobianco, Carlos Robles-Medranda, Subrata Ghosh, Marietta Iacucci\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Achieving histological remission is a desirable emerging treatment target in ulcerative colitis (UC), yet its assessment is challenging due to high inter- and intraobserver variability, reliance on experts, and lack of standardization. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise in addressing these issues. This systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression evaluated the AI's performance in assessing histological remission and compared it with that of pathologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline/PubMed and Scopus databases from inception to September 2024. We included studies on AI models assessing histological activity in UC, with or without comparison to pathologists. Pooled performance metrics were calculated: sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), observed agreement, and F1 score. A pairwise meta-analysis compared AI and pathologists, while sub-meta-analysis and meta-regression evaluated heterogeneity and factors influencing AI performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. AI models exhibited strong performance with a pooled sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88), specificity 0.87 (0.84-0.91), PPV 0.90 (0.87-0.92), NPV 0.80 (0.71-0.88), observed agreement 0.85 (0.82-0.89), and F1 score 0.85 (0.82-0.89). AI models demonstrated no significant differences with pathologists for specificity, observed agreement, and F1 score, while they were outperformed by pathologists for sensitivity and NPV. AI models for the adult population were linked to reduced heterogeneity and enhanced AI performance at meta-regression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI shows significant potential for assessing histological remission in UC and performs comparably to pathologists. Future research should focus on standardized, large-scale studies to minimize heterogeneity and support widespread AI implementation in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Crohn's & colitis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724188/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Crohn's & colitis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Crohn's & colitis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:实现组织学缓解是溃疡性结肠炎(UC)的一个理想的新兴治疗目标,但由于观察者之间和内部的高度变异性,对专家的依赖以及缺乏标准化,其评估具有挑战性。人工智能(AI)有望解决这些问题。本系统综述、荟萃分析和荟萃回归评估了人工智能在评估组织学缓解方面的表现,并将其与病理学家的表现进行了比较。方法:检索Medline/PubMed和Scopus数据库,检索时间为建库至2024年9月。我们纳入了评估UC组织学活动的人工智能模型的研究,有或没有与病理学家进行比较。计算综合性能指标:敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值(PPV和NPV)、观察一致性和F1评分。两两荟萃分析比较了人工智能和病理学家,而亚荟萃分析和元回归评估了人工智能表现的异质性和影响因素。结果:12项研究符合纳入标准。AI模型的综合灵敏度为0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.88),特异性为0.87 (0.84- 0.91),PPV为0.90 (0.87-0.92),NPV为0.80(0.71-0.88),观察一致性为0.85 (0.82-0.89),F1评分为0.85(0.82-0.89)。AI模型在特异性、观察一致性和F1评分方面与病理学家无显著差异,但在敏感性和NPV方面优于病理学家。在元回归中,用于成年人群的人工智能模型与减少异质性和提高人工智能性能有关。结论:人工智能在评估UC的组织学缓解方面具有重要的潜力,并且与病理学家的表现相当。未来的研究应侧重于标准化的大规模研究,以最大限度地减少异质性,并支持人工智能在临床实践中的广泛应用。
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-enabled histology exhibits comparable accuracy to pathologists in assessing histological remission in ulcerative colitis: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

Background and aims: Achieving histological remission is a desirable emerging treatment target in ulcerative colitis (UC), yet its assessment is challenging due to high inter- and intraobserver variability, reliance on experts, and lack of standardization. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise in addressing these issues. This systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression evaluated the AI's performance in assessing histological remission and compared it with that of pathologists.

Methods: We searched Medline/PubMed and Scopus databases from inception to September 2024. We included studies on AI models assessing histological activity in UC, with or without comparison to pathologists. Pooled performance metrics were calculated: sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), observed agreement, and F1 score. A pairwise meta-analysis compared AI and pathologists, while sub-meta-analysis and meta-regression evaluated heterogeneity and factors influencing AI performance.

Results: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. AI models exhibited strong performance with a pooled sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88), specificity 0.87 (0.84-0.91), PPV 0.90 (0.87-0.92), NPV 0.80 (0.71-0.88), observed agreement 0.85 (0.82-0.89), and F1 score 0.85 (0.82-0.89). AI models demonstrated no significant differences with pathologists for specificity, observed agreement, and F1 score, while they were outperformed by pathologists for sensitivity and NPV. AI models for the adult population were linked to reduced heterogeneity and enhanced AI performance at meta-regression.

Conclusions: AI shows significant potential for assessing histological remission in UC and performs comparably to pathologists. Future research should focus on standardized, large-scale studies to minimize heterogeneity and support widespread AI implementation in clinical practice.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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