Dataset Information

Technical and Diagnostic Issues in Whole Slide Imaging Published Validation Studies

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Digital pathology with whole-slide imaging (WSI) has many potential clinical and non-clinical applications. In the past two decades, despite significant advances in WSI technology adoption remains slow for primary diagnosis. The aim of this study was to identify common pitfalls of WSI reported in validation studies and offer measures to overcome these challenges.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in the electronic databases Pubmed-MEDLINE and Embase. Inclusion criteria were all validation studies designed to evaluate the feasibility of WSI for diagnostic clinical use in pathology. Technical and diagnostic problems encountered with WSI in these studies were recorded.

Results

A total of 45 studies were identified in which technical issues were reported in 15 (33%), diagnostic issues in 8 (18%), and 22 (49%) reported both. Key technical problems encompassed slide scan failure, prolonged time for pathologists to review cases, and a need for higher image resolution. Diagnostic challenges encountered were concerned with grading dysplasia, reliable assessment of mitoses, identification of microorganisms, and clearly defining the invasive front of tumors.

Conclusion

Despite technical advances with WSI technology, some critical concerns remain that need to be addressed to ensure trustworthy clinical diagnostic use. More focus on the quality of the pre-scanning phase and training of pathologists could help reduce the negative impact of WSI technical difficulties. WSI also seems to exacerbate specific diagnostic tasks that are already challenging among pathologists even when examining glass slides with conventional light microscopy.

SUBMITTER: Rizzo P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9246412 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOnly prototypes 5 years ago, high-speed, automated whole slide imaging (WSI) systems (also called digital slide systems, virtual microscopes or wide field imagers) are becoming increasingly capable and robust. Modern devices can capture a slide in 5 minutes at spatial sampling periods of less than 0.5 micron/pixel. The capacity to rapidly digitize large numbers of slides should eventually have a profound, positive impact on pathology. It is important, however, that pathologists validate these systems during development, not only to identify their limitations but to guide their evolution.MethodsThree pathologists fully signed out 25 cases representing 31 parts. The laboratory information system was used to simulate real-world sign-out conditions including entering a full diagnostic field and comment (when appropriate) and ordering special stains and recuts. For each case, discrepancies between diagnoses were documented by committee and a "consensus" report was formed and then compared with the microscope-based, sign-out report from the clinical archive.ResultsIn 17 of 25 cases there were no discrepancies between the individual study pathologist reports. In 8 of the remaining cases, there were 12 discrepancies, including 3 in which image quality could be at least partially implicated. When the WSI consensus diagnoses were compared with the original sign-out diagnoses, no significant discrepancies were found. Full text of the pathologist reports, the WSI consensus diagnoses, and the original sign-out diagnoses are available as an attachment to this publication.ConclusionThe results indicated that the image information contained in current whole slide images is sufficient for pathologists to make reliable diagnostic decisions and compose complex diagnostic reports. This is a very positive result; however, this does not mean that WSI is as good as a microscope. Virtually every slide had focal areas in which image quality (focus and dynamic range) was less than perfect. In some cases, there was evidence of over-compression and regions made "soft" by less than perfect focus. We expect systems will continue to get better, image quality and speed will continue to improve, but that further validation studies will be needed to guide development of this promising technology.

Project description:The search for new treatments for seizures, epilepsies, and their comorbidities faces considerable challenges. This is due in part to gaps in our understanding of the etiology and pathophysiology of most forms of epilepsy. An additional challenge is the difficulty in predicting the efficacy, tolerability, and impact of potential new treatments on epilepsies and comorbidities in humans, using the available resources. Herein we provide a summary of the discussions and proposals of the Working Group 2 as presented in the Joint American Epilepsy Society and International League Against Epilepsy Translational Workshop in London (September 2012). We propose methodologic and reporting practices that will enhance the uniformity, reliability, and reporting of early stage preclinical studies with animal seizure and epilepsy models that aim to develop and evaluate new therapies for seizures or epilepsies, using multidisciplinary approaches. The topics considered include the following: (1) implementation of better study design and reporting practices; (2) incorporation in the study design and analysis of covariants that may influence outcomes (including species, age, sex); (3) utilization of approaches to document target relevance, exposure, and engagement by the tested treatment; (4) utilization of clinically relevant treatment protocols; (5) optimization of the use of video-electroencephalography (EEG) recordings to best meet the study goals; and (6) inclusion of outcome measures that address the tolerability of the treatment or study end points apart from seizures. We further discuss the different expectations for studies aiming to meet regulatory requirements to obtain approval for clinical testing in humans. Implementation of the rigorous practices discussed in this report will require considerable investment in time, funds, and other research resources, which may create challenges for academic researchers seeking to contribute to epilepsy therapy discovery and development. We propose several infrastructure initiatives to overcome these barriers.

Project description:CONTEXT:There is increasing interest in using whole slide imaging (WSI) for diagnostic purposes (primary and/or consultation). An important consideration is whether WSI can safely replace conventional light microscopy as the method by which pathologists review histologic sections, cytology slides, and/or hematology slides to render diagnoses. Validation of WSI is crucial to ensure that diagnostic performance based on digitized slides is at least equivalent to that of glass slides and light microscopy. Currently, there are no standard guidelines regarding validation of WSI for diagnostic use. OBJECTIVE:To recommend validation requirements for WSI systems to be used for diagnostic purposes. DESIGN:The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center convened a nonvendor panel from North America with expertise in digital pathology to develop these validation recommendations. A literature review was performed in which 767 international publications that met search term requirements were identified. Studies outside the scope of this effort and those related solely to technical elements, education, and image analysis were excluded. A total of 27 publications were graded and underwent data extraction for evidence evaluation. Recommendations were derived from the strength of evidence determined from 23 of these published studies, open comment feedback, and expert panel consensus. RESULTS:Twelve guideline statements were established to help pathology laboratories validate their own WSI systems intended for clinical use. Validation of the entire WSI system, involving pathologists trained to use the system, should be performed in a manner that emulates the laboratory's actual clinical environment. It is recommended that such a validation study include at least 60 routine cases per application, comparing intraobserver diagnostic concordance between digitized and glass slides viewed at least 2 weeks apart. It is important that the validation process confirm that all material present on a glass slide to be scanned is included in the digital image. CONCLUSIONS:Validation should demonstrate that the WSI system under review produces acceptable digital slides for diagnostic interpretation. The intention of validating WSI systems is to permit the clinical use of this technology in a manner that does not compromise patient care.