Andrew Janowczyk1, Ren Zuo1, Hannah Gilmore2, Michael Feldman3, Anant Madabhushi1,4. 1. Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 2. University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH. 3. University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Administration Medical Center, Cleveland, OH.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Digital pathology (DP), referring to the digitization of tissue slides, is beginning to change the landscape of clinical diagnostic workflows and has engendered active research within the area of computational pathology. One of the challenges in DP is the presence of artefacts and batch effects, unintentionally introduced during both routine slide preparation (eg, staining, tissue folding) and digitization (eg, blurriness, variations in contrast and hue). Manual review of glass and digital slides is laborious, qualitative, and subject to intra- and inter-reader variability. Therefore, there is a critical need for a reproducible automated approach of precisely localizing artefacts to identify slides that need to be reproduced or regions that should be avoided during computational analysis. METHODS: Here we present HistoQC, a tool for rapidly performing quality control to not only identify and delineate artefacts but also discover cohort-level outliers (eg, slides stained darker or lighter than others in the cohort). This open-source tool employs a combination of image metrics (eg, color histograms, brightness, contrast), features (eg, edge detectors), and supervised classifiers (eg, pen detection) to identify artefact-free regions on digitized slides. These regions and metrics are presented to the user via an interactive graphical user interface, facilitating artefact detection through real-time visualization and filtering. These same metrics afford users the opportunity to explicitly define acceptable tolerances for their workflows. RESULTS: The output of HistoQC on 450 slides from The Cancer Genome Atlas was reviewed by two pathologists and found to be suitable for computational analysis more than 95% of the time. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that HistoQC could provide an automated, quantifiable, quality control process for identifying artefacts and measuring slide quality, in turn helping to improve both the repeatability and robustness of DP workflows.
PURPOSE: Digital pathology (DP), referring to the digitization of tissue slides, is beginning to change the landscape of clinical diagnostic workflows and has engendered active research within the area of computational pathology. One of the challenges in DP is the presence of artefacts and batch effects, unintentionally introduced during both routine slide preparation (eg, staining, tissue folding) and digitization (eg, blurriness, variations in contrast and hue). Manual review of glass and digital slides is laborious, qualitative, and subject to intra- and inter-reader variability. Therefore, there is a critical need for a reproducible automated approach of precisely localizing artefacts to identify slides that need to be reproduced or regions that should be avoided during computational analysis. METHODS: Here we present HistoQC, a tool for rapidly performing quality control to not only identify and delineate artefacts but also discover cohort-level outliers (eg, slides stained darker or lighter than others in the cohort). This open-source tool employs a combination of image metrics (eg, color histograms, brightness, contrast), features (eg, edge detectors), and supervised classifiers (eg, pen detection) to identify artefact-free regions on digitized slides. These regions and metrics are presented to the user via an interactive graphical user interface, facilitating artefact detection through real-time visualization and filtering. These same metrics afford users the opportunity to explicitly define acceptable tolerances for their workflows. RESULTS: The output of HistoQC on 450 slides from The Cancer Genome Atlas was reviewed by two pathologists and found to be suitable for computational analysis more than 95% of the time. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that HistoQC could provide an automated, quantifiable, quality control process for identifying artefacts and measuring slide quality, in turn helping to improve both the repeatability and robustness of DP workflows.
Authors: George Lee; Asha Singanamalli; Haibo Wang; Michael D Feldman; Stephen R Master; Natalie N C Shih; Elaine Spangler; Timothy Rebbeck; John E Tomaszewski; Anant Madabhushi Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Scott Doyle; James Monaco; Michael Feldman; John Tomaszewski; Anant Madabhushi Journal: BMC Bioinformatics Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Nicolas Coudray; Paolo Santiago Ocampo; Theodore Sakellaropoulos; Navneet Narula; Matija Snuderl; David Fenyö; Andre L Moreira; Narges Razavian; Aristotelis Tsirigos Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Patrick Leo; Robin Elliott; Natalie N C Shih; Sanjay Gupta; Michael Feldman; Anant Madabhushi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Amir Reza Sadri; Andrew Janowczyk; Ren Zhou; Ruchika Verma; Niha Beig; Jacob Antunes; Anant Madabhushi; Pallavi Tiwari; Satish E Viswanath Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Matthew G Hanna; Orly Ardon; Victor E Reuter; Sahussapont Joseph Sirintrapun; Christine England; David S Klimstra; Meera R Hameed Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Xiang Li; Richard C Davis; Yuemei Xu; Zehan Wang; Nao Souma; Gina Sotolongo; Jonathan Bell; Matthew Ellis; David Howell; Xiling Shen; Kyle J Lafata; Laura Barisoni Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2021-12-20
Authors: Eliot G Peyster; Sara Arabyarmohammadi; Andrew Janowczyk; Sepideh Azarianpour-Esfahani; Miroslav Sekulic; Clarissa Cassol; Luke Blower; Anil Parwani; Priti Lal; Michael D Feldman; Kenneth B Margulies; Anant Madabhushi Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 35.855