Artificial intelligence in digital pathology — new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology (original) (raw)

• Prewitt, J. M. S. Intelligent microscopes: recent and near-future advances. Proc. SPIE https://doi.org/10.1117/12.958214 (1979).
• Prewitt, J. M. S. Parametric and nonparametric recognition by computer: an application to leukocyte image processing. Adv. Comput. 12, 285–414 (1972).
• Prewitt, J. M. S. & Mendelsohn, M. L. The analysis of cell images. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 128, 1035–1053 (1966).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N. & Shannon, C. E. A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence, August 31, 1955. AI Mag. 27, 12 (2006).
  Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J. J., Minsky, M. L. & Rochester, N. Artificial intelligence. Research Laboratory of Electronics (RLE) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/52263 (1959).
• Yao, X. Evolving artificial neural networks. Proc. IEEE 87, 1423–1447 (1999).
  Google Scholar
• Haykin, S. Neural Networks (Prentice Hall, 1994).
  Google Scholar
• Deng, L. Deep learning: methods and applications. Found. Trends® Signal Process. 7, 197–387 (2014).
  Google Scholar
• LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 521, 436–444 (2015).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Hinton, G. E. & Salakhutdinov, R. R. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313, 504–507 (2006).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever I. & Hinton, G. E. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Nips.cc http://papers.nips.cc/paper/4824-imagenet-classification-with-deep-convolutional-neural-networks.pdf (2012).
• LeCun, Y., Huang, F. J. & Bottou, L. in Proc. 2004 IEEE Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. II–104 (IEEE, 2004).
• LeCun, Y. & Bengio, Y. in The handbook of brain theory and neural networks (ed. Arbib, M. A.) 255–258 (MIT Press, 1998).
  Google Scholar
• LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y. & Haffner, P. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 86, 2278–2324 (1998).
  Google Scholar
• Deng, J., et al. in 2009 IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. 248–255 (IEEE, 2009).
• Mukhopadhyay, S. et al. Whole slide imaging versus microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology: a multicenter blinded randomized noninferiority study of 1992 cases (Pivotal Study). Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 42, 39–52 (2018).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Kujan, O. et al. Why oral histopathology suffers inter-observer variability on grading oral epithelial dysplasia: an attempt to understand the sources of variation. Oral Oncol. 43, 224–231 (2007).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Chi, A. C., Katabi, N., Chen, H.-S. & Cheng, Y.-S. L. Interobserver variation among pathologists in evaluating perineural invasion for oral squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck Pathol. 10, 451–464 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Evans, A. J. et al. Interobserver variability between expert urologic pathologists for extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 32, 1503–1512 (2008).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Shanes, J. G. et al. Interobserver variability in the pathologic interpretation of endomyocardial biopsy results. Circulation 75, 401–405 (1987).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Elmore, J. G. et al. Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast biopsy specimens. JAMA 313, 1122–1132 (2015).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Brimo, F., Schultz, L. & Epstein, J. I. The value of mandatory second opinion pathology review of prostate needle biopsy interpretation before radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 184, 126–130 (2010).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Kilgore, M. L. & Goldman, D. P. Drug costs and out-of-pocket spending in cancer clinical trials. Contemp. Clin. Trials 29, 1–8 (2008).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Agarwal, A., Ressler, D. & Snyder, G. The current and future state of companion diagnostics. Pharmacogenomics Pers. Med. 8, 99–110 (2015).
  Google Scholar
• Michor, F. & Polyak, K. The origins and implications of intratumor heterogeneity. Cancer Prev. Res. 3, 1361–1364 (2010).
  Google Scholar
• Cyll, K. et al. Tumour heterogeneity poses a significant challenge to cancer biomarker research. Br. J. Cancer 117, 367–375 (2017).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Bejnordi, B. E. et al. Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer. JAMA 318, 2199–2210 (2017).
  Google Scholar
• Nagpal, K. et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for improving Gleason scoring of prostate cancer. npj Digital Med. 2, 48 (2019).
  Google Scholar
• Bychkov, D. et al. Deep learning based tissue analysis predicts outcome in colorectal cancer. Sci. Rep. 8, 3395 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Wang, D., Khosla, A., Gargeya, R., Irshad, H. & Beck, A. H. Deep learning for identifying metastatic breast cancer. ArXiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.05718 (2016).
• Steiner, D. et al. Impact of deep learning assistance on the histopathologic review of lymph nodes for metastatic breast cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 42, 1636–1646 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Chen, J. & Srinivas, C. Automatic lymphocyte detection in H&E images with deep neural networks. ArXiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03217 (2016).
• Garcia, E., et al. in 2017 IEEE 30th Int. Symp. Comput.-Based Med. Sys. (CBMS). 200–204 (IEEE, 2017).
• Lu, C. et al. Multi-pass adaptive voting for nuclei detection in histopathological images. Sci. Rep. 6, 33985 (2016).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Sornapudi, S. et al. Deep learning nuclei detection in digitized histology images by superpixels. J. Pathol. Inform. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpi.jpi_74_17 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Wang, H. et al. Mitosis detection in breast cancer pathology images by combining handcrafted and convolutional neural network features. J. Med. Imaging (Bellingham) 1, 034003 (2014).
  Google Scholar
• Al-Kofahi, Y., Lassoued, W., Lee, W. & Roysam, B. Improved automatic detection and segmentation of cell nuclei in histopathology images. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57, 841–852 (2010).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Naik, S., et al. in 2008 5th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro. 284–287 (IEEE, 2008).
• Nguyen, K., Jain, A. K. & Allen, R. L. in 2010 20th Int. Conf. Pattern Recognit. 1497–1500 (IEEE, 2010).
• Kothari, S., et al. in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro 657–660 (2011, IEEE).
• Sirinukunwattana, K. et al. Gland segmentation in colon histology images: the glas challenge contest. Med. Image Anal. 35, 489–502 (2017).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Lee, G. et al. Co-occurring gland angularity in localized subgraphs: predicting biochemical recurrence in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. PLOS ONE 9, e97954 (2014).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Lee, G. et al. Nuclear shape and architecture in benign fields predict biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy: preliminary findings. Eur. Urol. Focus 3, 457–466 (2017).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Lu, C. et al. Nuclear shape and orientation features from H&E images predict survival in early-stage estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. Lab. Investig. J. Tech. Methods Pathol. 98, 1438–1448 (2018).
  CAS Google Scholar
• Corredor, G. et al. Spatial architecture and arrangement of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes for predicting likelihood of recurrence in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 1526–1534 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Mungle, T. et al. MRF‐ANN: a machine learning approach for automated ER scoring of breast cancer immunohistochemical images. J. Microsc. 267, 117–129 (2017).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Wang, X. et al. Prediction of recurrence in early stage non-small cell lung cancer using computer extracted nuclear features from digital H&E images. Sci. Rep. 7, 13543 (2017).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Rosado, B. et al. Accuracy of computer diagnosis of melanoma: a quantitative meta-analysis. Arch. Dermatol. 139, 361–367 (2003).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, B. E. et al. Computer-assisted measurement of primary tumor area is prognostic of recurrence-free survival in stage IB melanoma patients. Mod. Pathol. 30, 1402–1410 (2017).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Teramoto, A., Tsukamoto, T., Kiriyama, Y. & Fujita, H. Automated classification of lung cancer types from cytological images using deep convolutional neural networks. Biomed. Res. Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4067832 (2017).
  Google Scholar
• Wu, M., Yan, C., Liu, H. & Liu, Q. Automatic classification of ovarian cancer types from cytological images using deep convolutional neural networks. Biosci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20180289 (2018).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Ali, S., Basavanhally, A., Ganesan, S. & Madabhushi, A. Histogram of Hosoya indices for assessing similarity across subgraph populations: breast cancer prognosis prediction from digital pathology [abstract 118]. Lab. Invest. (supplement) 95, 32A (2015).
• Yu, K.-H. et al. Predicting non-small cell lung cancer prognosis by fully automated microscopic pathology image features. Nat. Commun. 7, 12474 (2016).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Cruz-Roa, A. et al. Accurate and reproducible invasive breast cancer detection in whole-slide images: a deep learning approach for quantifying tumor extent. Sci. Rep. 7, 46450 (2017).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Liu, Y. et al. Artificial intelligence-based breast cancer nodal metastasis detection. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 143, 859–868 (2018).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Litjens, G. et al. 1399 H&E-stained sentinel lymph node sections of breast cancer patients: the CAMELYON dataset. GigaScience 7, giy065 (2018).
  PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Liu, Y. et al. Detecting cancer metastases on gigapixel pathology images. ArXiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02442 (2017).
  Google Scholar
• Madabhushi, A. & Lee, G. Image analysis and machine learning in digital pathology: challenges and opportunities. Med. Image Anal. 33, 170–175 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Jansen, I. et al. Histopathology: ditch the slides, because digital and 3D are on show. World J. Urol. 36, 549–555 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Ali, S., Lewis, J. & Madabhushi, A. Spatially aware cell cluster(spACC1) graphs: predicting outcome in oropharyngeal pl6+ tumors. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 16, 412–419 (2013).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Mobadersany, P. et al. Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E2970–E2979 (2018).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Wang, X. et al. Computer extracted features of cancer nuclei from H&E stained tissues of tumor predicts response to nivolumab in non-small cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 36(15_suppl), 12061–12061 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Barrera, C. et al. Computer-extracted features relating to spatial arrangement of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes to predict response to nivolumab in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 12115–12115 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Wang, X., et al. Computerized nuclear morphometric features from H&E slide images are prognostic of recurrence and predictive of added benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Presented at the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology’s 108th Annual Meeting. (2019).
• Gisselsson, D. et al. Abnormal nuclear shape in solid tumors reflects mitotic instability. Am. J. Pathol. 158, 199–206 (2001).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Malon, C. D. & Cosatto, E. Classification of mitotic figures with convolutional neural networks and seeded blob features. J. Pathol. Inform. 4, 9 (2013).
  Google Scholar
• Whitney, J. et al. Quantitative nuclear histomorphometry predicts oncotype DX risk categories for early stage ER+ breast cancer. BMC Cancer 18, 610 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Simon, I., Pound, C. R., Partin, A. W., Clemens, J. Q. & Christens‐Barry, W. A. Automated image analysis system for detecting boundaries of live prostate cancer cells. Cytom. J. Int. Soc. Anal. Cytol. 31, 287–294 (1998).
  CAS Google Scholar
• Basavanhally, A. et al. Multi-field-of-view framework for distinguishing tumor grade in ER+ breast cancer from entire histopathology slides. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 60, 2089–2099 (2013).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. S., Ali, S., Luo, J., Thorstad, W. L. & Madabhushi, A. A quantitative histomorphometric classifier (QuHbIC) identifies aggressive versus indolent p16-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 38, 128–137 (2014).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Barker, J., Hoogi, A., Depeursinge, A. & Rubin, D. L. Automated classification of brain tumor type in whole-slide digital pathology images using local representative tiles. Med. Image Anal. 30, 60–71 (2016).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Kong, J. et al. Machine-based morphologic analysis of glioblastoma using whole-slide pathology images uncovers clinically relevant molecular correlates. PLOS ONE 8, e81049 (2013).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Osareh, A. & Shadgar, B. in 2010 5th Int. Symp. Health Informat. Bioinformat. 114–120 (2010, IEEE).
• Veta, M. et al. Prognostic value of automatically extracted nuclear morphometric features in whole slide images of male breast cancer. Mod. Pathol. 25, 1559 (2012).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Lu, C. et al. An oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma quantitative histomorphometric-based image classifier of nuclear morphology can risk stratify patients for disease-specific survival. Mod. Pathol. 30, 1655–1665 (2017).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Saltz, J. et al. Spatial organization and molecular correlation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes using deep learning on pathology images. Cell Rep. 23, 181–193.e7 (2018).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Yuan, Y. Modelling the spatial heterogeneity and molecular correlates of lymphocytic infiltration in triple-negative breast cancer. J. R. Soc. Interface https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.1153 (2015).
  PubMed Central PubMed Google Scholar
• Heindl, A., et al. Relevance of spatial heterogeneity of immune infiltration for predicting risk of recurrence after endocrine therapy of ER+ breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer. Inst. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx137 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Beck, A. H. et al. Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci. Transl Med. 3, 108ra113 (2011).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Bhargava, H. K. et al. Computer-extracted stromal features of African-Americans versus Caucasians from H&E slides and impact on prognosis of biochemical recurrence. J. Clin. Oncol. 36(15_suppl), 12075–12075 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Vamathevan, J. et al. Applications of machine learning in drug discovery and development. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 18, 463–477 (2019).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Janowczyk, A. & Madabhushi, A. Deep learning for digital pathology image analysis: A comprehensive tutorial with selected use cases. J. Pathol. Inform. 7, 29 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Araújo, T. et al. Classification of breast cancer histology images using Convolutional Neural Networks. PLOS ONE 12, e0177544 (2017).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Ehteshami Bejnordi, B. et al. Using deep convolutional neural networks to identify and classify tumor-associated stroma in diagnostic breast biopsies. Mod. Pathol. 31, 1502–1512 (2018).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Haenssle, H. A. et al. Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists. Ann. Oncol. 29, 1836–1842 (2018).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Sheikhzadeh F., Guillaud, M. & Ward, R. K. Automatic labeling of molecular biomarkers of whole slide immunohistochemistry images using fully convolutional networks. PLOS ONE 13, e0190783 (2018).
• Basavanhally, A. N. et al. Computerized image-based detection and grading of lymphocytic infiltration in HER2+ breast cancer histopathology. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57, 642–653 (2010).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Alzubaidi, L. et al. A robust deep learning approach to detect nuclei in histopathological images. Int. J. Innov. Res. Comp. Commun. Eng. 5, 4461–4467 (2007).
  Google Scholar
• Höfener, H. et al. Deep learning nuclei detection: a simple approach can deliver state-of-the-art results. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 70, 43–52 (2018).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Xu, J., Luo, X., Wang, G., Gilmore, H. & Madabhushi, A. A deep convolutional neural network for segmenting and classifying epithelial and stromal regions in histopathological images. Neurocomputing 191, 214–223 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Senaras, C., Niazi, M. K. K., Lozanski, G. & Gurcan, M. N. DeepFocus: detection of out-of-focus regions in whole slide digital images using deep learning. PLOS ONE 13, e0205387 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Esteva, A. et al. Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature 542, 115–118 (2017).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Tschandl, P. et al. Comparison of the accuracy of human readers versus machine-learning algorithms for pigmented skin lesion classification: an open, web-based, international, diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 20, 938–947 (2019).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Couture, H. D. et al. Image analysis with deep learning to predict breast cancer grade, ER status, histologic subtype, and intrinsic subtype. npj Breast Cancer 4, 30 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Romo-Bucheli, D., Janowczyk, A., Gilmore, H., Romero, E. & Madabhushi, A. A deep learning based strategy for identifying and associating mitotic activity with gene expression derived risk categories in estrogen receptor positive breast cancers. Cytomtery A 91, 566–573 (2017).
  CAS Google Scholar
• Geessink, O. G. F., et al. Computer aided quantification of intratumoral stroma yields an independent prognosticator in rectal cancer. Cell Oncol. 42, 331–341 (2019).
  Google Scholar
• Kather, J. N. et al. Predicting survival from colorectal cancer histology slides using deep learning: A retrospective multicenter study. PLOS Med. 16, e1002730 (2019).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Rodner, E. et al. Fully convolutional networks in multimodal nonlinear microscopy images for automated detection of head and neck carcinoma: pilot study. Head Neck 41, 116–121 (2019).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Cruz-Roa, A. et al. High-throughput adaptive sampling for whole-slide histopathology image analysis (HASHI) via convolutional neural networks: application to invasive breast cancer detection. PLOS ONE 13, e0196828 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E. & Williams, R. J. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323, 533–536 (1986).
  Google Scholar
• Hochreiter, S. & Schmidhuber, J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 9, 1735–1780 (1997).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Li, W., Gauci, M. & Gross, R. in Proc. 15th Ann. Conf. Genet. Evolut. Computat. 223–230. (ACM, 2013).
• Hou, L., et al. Unsupervised histopathology image synthesis. ArXiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.05021 (2017).
• Shaban, M. T., Baur, C., Navab, N. & Albarqouni, S. StainGAN: stain style transfer for digital histological images. IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBI.2019.8759152 (2018).
• Xu, Z., Moro, C. F., Bozóky, B. & Zhang, Q. GAN-based virtual re-staining: a promising solution for whole slide image analysis. ArXiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.04059 (2019).
• Gadermayr, M., Gupta, L., Klinkhammer, B. M., Boor, P. & Merhof, D. Unsupervisedly training GANs for segmenting digital pathology with automatically generated annotations. Proc. Machine Learn. 102, 175–184 (2018).
• Kapil, A., et al. Deep semi supervised generative learning for automated PD-L1 tumor cell scoring on NSCLC tissue needle biopsies. Sci. Rep. 8,17343 (2018).
• Boutros, P. C. The path to routine use of genomic biomarkers in the cancer clinic. Genome Res. 25, 1508–1513 (2015).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Chatterjee, S. K. & Zetter, B. R. Cancer biomarkers: knowing the present and predicting the future. Future Oncol. 1, 37–50 (2005).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Grigg, C. & Rizvi, N. A. PD-L1 biomarker testing for non-small cell lung cancer: truth or fiction? J. Immunother. Cancer 4, 48 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Mroz, E. A. & Rocco, J. W. Intra-tumor heterogeneity in head and neck cancer and its clinical implications. World J. Otorhinolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2, 60–67 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Morris, L. G. T. et al. Pan-cancer analysis of intratumor heterogeneity as a prognostic determinant of survival. Oncotarget 7, 10051–10063 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Sottoriva, A. et al. Intratumor heterogeneity in human glioblastoma reflects cancer evolutionary dynamics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 4009–4014 (2013).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Verma, N. et al. Image-based risk score to predict recurrence of ER+ breast cancer in ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group E2197. J. Clin. Oncol. 36 (15_suppl), 540 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, S. B., Lee, G., Ali, S. & Madabhushi, A. Feature importance in nonlinear embeddings (FINE): applications in digital pathology. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. 35, 76–88 (2016).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Cooper, L. A. D. et al. Novel genotype-phenotype associations in human cancers enabled by advanced molecular platforms and computational analysis of whole slide images. Lab. Investig. J. Tech. Methods Pathol. 95, 366–376 (2015).
  Google Scholar
• Lloyd, M. C., Johnson, J. O., Kasprzak, A. & Bui, M. M. Image analysis of the tumor microenvironment. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 936, 1–10 (2016).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Hamilton, P. W. et al. Digital pathology and image analysis in tissue biomarker research. Methods 70, 59–73 (2014).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Barsoum, I., Tawedrous, E., Faragalla, H. & Yousef, G. M. Histo-genomics: digital pathology at the forefront of precision medicine. Diagnosis https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2018-0064 (2018).
  Article Google Scholar
• FDA. Developing a software precertification program: a working model. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/media/119722/download (2019).
• Daniel, G., Silcox, C., Sharma, I. & Wright, M. Current state and near-term priorities for AI-enabled diagnostic support software in health care. Duke.edu https://healthpolicy.duke.edu/sites/default/files/atoms/files/dukemargolisaienableddxss.pdf (2019).
• Pesapane, F., Volonté, C., Codari, M. & Sardanelli, F. Artificial intelligence as a medical device in radiology: ethical and regulatory issues in Europe and the United States. Insights Imaging 9, 745–753 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Rudin, C. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 206–215 (2019).
  Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. FDA in brief: FDA proposes improvements to the de novo pathway for novel medical devices to advance safe, effective, and innovative treatments for patients. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/FDAInBrief/ucm627522.htm (2018).
• European Commission. MDCG 2018-2 Future EU medical device nomenclature – description of requirements. Europa.eu https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/28668 (2018).
• European Economic Community. Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices. Europa.eu https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1993L0042:20071011:EN:PDF (1993).
• European Parliament. Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending directive 2001/83/EC, regulation (EC) no 178/2002 and regulation (EC) no 1223/2009 and repealing council directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (text with EEA relevance). Europa.eu http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/oj/eng (2017).
• European Parliament. Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing directive 98/79/EC and commission decision 2010/227/EU (Text with EEA relevance) Europa.eu http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/746/oj/eng (2017).
• García-Rojo, M., et al. New European Union regulations related to whole slide image scanners and image analysis software. J. Pathol. Inform. 10, https://doi.org/10.4103/jpi.jpi_33_18 (2019).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Arterys. Medical imaging cloud AI. Arterys.com https://www.arterys.com/ (2019).
• Arterys Inc. Arterys receives first FDA clearance for broad oncology imaging suite with deep learning. Prnewswire.com https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/arterys-receives-first-fda-clearance-for-broad-oncology-imaging-suite-with-deep-learning-300599275.html (2018).
• Food and Drug Administration. IntelliSite Pathology Solution (PIPS, Philips Medical Systems). Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/intellisite-pathology-solution-pips-philips-medical-systems (2017).
• PAIGE. PAIGE. Paige.ai https://paige.ai/ (2019).
• Business Wire. FDA grants breakthrough designation to Paige.AI. Businesswire.com https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190307005205/en/FDA-Grants-Breakthrough-Designation-Paige.AI (2019).
• Bueno, G., Fernández-Carrobles, M. M., Deniz, O. & García-Rojo, M. New trends of emerging technologies in digital pathology. Pathobiology 83, 61–69 (2016).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. Radiological computer-assisted diagnostic (CADx) software for lesions suspicious for cancer. Fda.gov. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf17/DEN170022.pdf (2017).
• Agendia. MammaPrint Test. Agendia.com https://www.agendia.com/our-tests/mammaprint/ (2019).
• Food and Drug Administration. MammaPrint 510(k) premarket notification. Fda.gov https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm?ID=k070675 (2019).
• OncotypeIQ. Smarter Cancer Care - Genomic Testing. Oncotypeiq.com https://www.oncotypeiq.com/en-US/ (2019).
• Food and Drug Administration. FDA issues warning letter to genomics lab for illegally marketing genetic test that claims to predict patients’ responses to specific medications. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-issues-warning-letter-genomics-lab-illegally-marketing-genetic-test-claims-predict-patients (2019).
• Food and Drug Administration. Discussion paper on laboratory developed tests (LDTs) January 13, 2017. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/media/102367/download (2019).
• Paxton, A. Laboratory-developed tests CAP suggests added oversight of homebrews. Captodayonline.com http://www.captodayonline.com/Archives/1009/1009d_laboratory_developed_tests.html (2009).
• Higgins, C. Applications and challenges of digital pathology and whole slide imaging. Biotech. Histochem. 90, 341–347 (2015).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Tizhoosh, H. R. & Pantanowitz, L. Artificial intelligence and digital pathology: challenges and opportunities. J. Pathol. Inform. 9, 38 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Doyle, S., Feldman, M., Tomaszewski, J. & Madabhushi, A. A boosted Bayesian multiresolution classifier for prostate cancer detection from digitized needle biopsies. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 59, 1205–1218 (2012).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Huang, B., Bates, M. & Zhuang, X. Super resolution fluorescence microscopy. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 78, 993–1016 (2009).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Kleppe, A. et al. Chromatin organisation and cancer prognosis: a pan-cancer study. Lancet Oncol. 19, 356–369 (2018).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Gallas, B. D. NCIP Hub - Group: eeDAP studies ~ Wiki: High-throughput Truthing - Year 2. Ncihub.org https://nciphub.org/groups/eedapstudies/wiki/HighThroughputTruthing/HighThroughputTruthingYear2 (2018).
• Grand Challenge. All Challenges. Grand-challenge.org https://grand-challenge.org/challenges/ (2019).
• Ching, P. et al. Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine. J. R. Soc. Interface 15, 20170387 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• Coudray, N. et al. Classification and mutation prediction from non-small cell lung cancer histopathology images using deep learning. Nat. Med. 24, 1559–1567 (2018).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Zech, J. R. et al. Variable generalization performance of a deep learning model to detect pneumonia in chest radiographs: a cross-sectional study. PLOS Med. 15, e1002683 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Yagi, Y. & Gilbertson, J. R. Digital Imaging in Pathology: The Case for Standardization. (SAGE Publications, 2005).
  Google Scholar
• Janowczyk, A., Basavanhally, A. & Madabhushi, A. Stain Normalization using Sparse AutoEncoders (StaNoSA): application to digital pathology. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 57, 50–61 (2017).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Khan, A. M., Rajpoot, N., Treanor, D. & Magee, D. A nonlinear mapping approach to stain normalization in digital histopathology images using image-specific color deconvolution. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 61, 1729–1738 (2014).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Vahadane, A. et al. Structure-preserving color normalization and sparse stain separation for histological images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. 35, 1962–1971 (2016).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Janowczyk, A., Zuo, R., Gilmore, H., Feldman, M. & Madabhushi, A. HistoQC: an open-source quality control tool for digital pathology slides. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform. 3, 1–7 (2019).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• choosehappy. HistoQC is an Open-source Quality Control Tool for Digital Pathology Slides: choosehappy/HistoQC. Github.com https://github.com/choosehappy/HistoQC (2019).
• Leo, P. et al. Stable and discriminating features are predictive of cancer presence and Gleason grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a multi-site study. Sci. Rep. 8, 14918 (2018).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Leo, P. et al. Evaluating stability of histomorphometric features across scanner and staining variations: prostate cancer diagnosis from whole slide images. J. Med. Imaging 3, 047502 (2016).
  Google Scholar
• Lowe, A. et al. Validation of digital pathology in a healthcare environment. Digitalpathologyassociation.org https://digitalpathologyassociation.org/_data/files/DPA-Healthcare-White-Paper--FINAL_v1.0.pdf (2011).
• Montalto, M. C. An industry perspective: an update on the adoption of whole slide imaging. J. Pathol. Inform. 7, 18 (2016).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Digital Pathology Association. Healthcare FAQs. Digitalpathologyassociation.org https://digitalpathologyassociation.org/healthcare-faqs (2019).
• Simon, R. M., Paik, S. & Hayes, D. F. Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 101, 1446–1452 (2009).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Hayes, D. F. et al. Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 88, 1456–1466 (1996).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Goetz, M. P. et al. NCCN Guidelines insights: breast cancer, version 3.2018. J. Natl Compr. Canc. Netw. 17, 118–126 (2019).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Sparano, J. A. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 111–121 (2018).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Cardoso, F. et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 717–729 (2016).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Paik, S. et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 351, 2817–2826 (2004).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• Paik, S. et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 3726–3734 (2006).
  CAS PubMed Google Scholar
• DecipherBio. GenomeDx Biosciences: Where to get decipher prostate cancer classifier. decipherbio.com https://genomedx.com/decipher-test/get-decipher/ (2019).
• Erho, N. et al. Discovery and validation of a prostate cancer genomic classifier that predicts early metastasis following radical prostatectomy. PLOS ONE. 8, e66855 (2013).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Carroll, P. H. & Mohler, J. L. NCCN guidelines updates: prostate cancer and prostate cancer early detection. J. Natl Compr. Canc. Netw. 16(5S), 620–623 (2018).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Bhargava, R. & Madabhushi, A. Emerging themes in image informatics and molecular analysis for digital pathology. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 18, 387–412 (2016).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Madabhushi, A. Digital pathology image analysis: opportunities and challenges. Imaging Med. 1, 7–10 (2009).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Madabhushi, A., Agner, S., Basavanhally, A., Doyle, S. & Lee, G. Computer-aided prognosis: predicting patient and disease outcome via quantitative fusion of multi-scale, multi-modal data. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 35, 506–514 (2011).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Pantanowitz, L. et al. Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 137, 1710–1722 (2013).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Fuchs, T. J., Wild, P. J., Moch, H. & Buhmann, J. M. Computational pathology analysis of tissue microarrays predicts survival of renal clear cell carcinoma patients. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 11, 1–8 (2008).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Haybäck, J. Mechanisms of Molecular Carcinogenesis – Volume 2. (Springer, 2017).
• Proscia. Proscia digital pathology. Proscia.com https://proscia.com (2019).
• Deep Lens. Digital pathology cloud platform. Deeplens.ai https://www.deeplens.ai (2019).
• PathAI. PathAI. Pathai.com https://www.pathai.com/ (2019).
• Aifora. WebMicroscope. Big pictures. Deep Diagnosis. Aiforia.com https://www.aiforia.com/ (2019).
• Glaser, A. K., et al. Light-sheet microscopy for slide-free non-destructive pathology of large clinical specimens. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 0084 (2017).
• Fereidouni, F. et al. Microscopy with ultraviolet surface excitation for rapid slide-free histology. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 957 (2017).
  CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Fraggetta, F., Garozzo, S., Zannoni, G. F., Pantanowitz, L. & Rossi, E. D. Routine digital pathology workflow: the Catania experience. J. Pathol. Inform. 8, 51 (2017).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
• Cheng, C. L. et al. Enabling digital pathology in the diagnostic setting: navigating through the implementation journey in an academic medical centre. J. Clin. Pathol. 69, 784–792 (2016).
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Tomczak, K., Czerwińska, P. & Wiznerowicz, M. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA): an immeasurable source of knowledge. Contemp. Oncol. 19, A68–77 (2015).
  Google Scholar
• Gutman, D. A. et al. Cancer Digital Slide Archive: an informatics resource to support integrated in silico analysis of TCGA pathology data. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 20, 1091–1098 (2013).
  PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar