| Literature DB >> 35694561 |
Briana A Santo1, Darshana Govind1, Parnaz Daneshpajouhnejad2, Xiaoping Yang2, Xiaoxin X Wang3, Komuraiah Myakala3, Bryce A Jones4, Moshe Levi3, Jeffrey B Kopp5, Teruhiko Yoshida5, Laura J Niedernhofer6, David Manthey7, Kyung Chul Moon8, Seung Seok Han9, Jarcy Zee10, Avi Z Rosenberg2, Pinaki Sarder1.
Abstract
Introduction: Podocyte depletion is a histomorphologic indicator of glomerular injury and predicts clinical outcomes. Podocyte estimation methods or podometrics are semiquantitative, technically involved, and laborious. Implementation of high-throughput podometrics in experimental and clinical workflows necessitates an automated podometrics pipeline. Recognizing that computational image analysis offers a robust approach to study cell and tissue structure, we developed and validated PodoCount (a computational tool for automated podocyte quantification in immunohistochemically labeled tissues) using a diverse data set.Entities:
Keywords: chronic kidney disease; digital pathology; gigapixel size images; glomerular disease; podocyte; podometrics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35694561 PMCID: PMC9174049 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2022.03.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Kidney Int Rep ISSN: 2468-0249
Figure 1Summary of data sets. The image data set contains light microscopic images of kidney tissues from 6 mouse models of glomerular disease and 5 stages of human DN. (a) The murine cohort was composed of tissues from 135 mice with control and diseased specimens for each model. Two distinct models of type II diabetes mellitus were studied (db/db and KKAy). The SAND intervention (saline, angiotensin II, uninephrectomy, and deoxycortisone) models postadaptive FSGS (FSGS [SAND]). Samples from SAND, HIVAN, and Progeroid syndrome models included male and female mice; those from the db/db, KKAy, and Aging mouse models consisted only of males. (b) The human DN study consisted of 45 patients (n = 35 male and n = 10 female subjects). Representative glomerular p57-PAS image from (c) each mouse model and (d) each Tervaert stage of the human DN cohort. DN, diabetic nephropathy; FSGS (SAND), a postadaptive model of FSGS, focal segmental glomerular sclerosis; HIVAN, HIV-associated nephropathy.
Histologic image feature definitions for podometrics
| Features | Definition |
|---|---|
| PC | Corrected podocyte count after application of the single-section method’s CF. Computed as number of podocyte nuclear profiles times the CF. |
| GA | Cross-sectional area of the glomerulus unit (μm2). |
| GPD | Podocyte volume density is computed as the ratio of the corrected podocyte count to the glomerulus volume and approximates the spatial density of podocytes (number per 106 μm3). |
| TPA | Total podocyte nuclear area is computed as the cumulative area of podocyte nuclear profiles for a given glomerular unit (μm2). |
| GPC | Glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage is computed as the ratio of total podocyte nuclear area to glomerulus unit cross-sectional area. |
2D, two-dimensional; CF, correction factor; GA, glomerulus area; GPC, glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage; GPD, glomerular podocyte density; PC, corrected podocyte count; TPA, total podocyte nuclear area.
Podocyte morphometrics are invaluable tools for prognostication. Podometric methodologies compute podocyte nuclear count, size, and spatial density, relative to glomerulus area, to provide quantitative modeling of progressive glomerular disease. These features are incorporated into PodoCount as PC, GA, GPD, TPA, and GPC to quantify podocyte depletion through image features engineered from digitized renal histopathology. All reported podometric feature values are based on 2D quantification from glomerulus profiles in whole kidney sections.
Computational performance of podocyte detection and image segmentation
| Segmented region(s) | Assessment of image segmentation and podocyte detection | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity med. (avg./[range]) | Specificity med. (avg./[range]) | Precision med. (avg./[range]) | Accuracy med. (avg./[range]) | Hit-miss percent | |
| Tissue boundary | 0.996 (0.994/0.985–0.997) | 0.998 (0.998/0.996–1.000) | 0.990 (0.990/0.977–0.998) | 0.997 (0.998/0.996–0.999) | — |
| Glom boundary | 0.966 (0.965/0.954–0.977) | 0.999 (0.999/0.999–1.000) | 0.916 (0.917/0.875–0.943) | 0.999 (0.999/0.999–1.000) | — |
| Podocyte nuclei | 0.846 (0.834/0.425–0.993) | 0.997 (0.994/0.980–1.000) | 0.931 (0.933/0.763–1.000) | 0.997 (0.992/0.943–1.000) | 0.980 |
Avg., average; DN, diabetic nephropathy; Glom, glomerulus; Med., median.
Sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy were computed for image segmentation tasks, and percentage accuracy in podocyte nuclear detection was assessed by Hit-Miss (i.e., frequency at which podocyte nuclei were positively identified). Performance analysis for segmentation of tissues and glomerulus unit boundaries was completed for n = 12 randomly selected whole-slide images, equally distributed across data sets and disease states. Assessment of podocyte detection and image segmentation tasks was completed using n = 240 glomerulus images randomly and equally sampled from murine (n = 40 per cohort, 20 each from control and disease) and human (n = 40 per DN stage) data. High performance was observed for segmentation of tissue and glomerulus unit boundaries. Although podocyte nuclear segmentation was less sensitive and precise, podocytes were positively detected 98% of the time. Lesser performance in podocyte nuclear segmentation was attributed to the challenge of manually delineating a consistent boundary about immunohistochemistry-labeled nuclei in brightfield images.
Comparison of podocyte counts by PodoCount and the single-section method
| Cohort | Comparison of PodoCount automated counts vs. the single-section method | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median error in estimation | Pearson correlation analysis | ||||
| Residual | Absolute | 95% CI for | |||
| db/db | −0.01 | 0.26 | 0.95 | (0.91–0.98) | <0.001 |
| KKAy | −0.36 | 0.47 | 0.82 | (0.68–0.90) | <0.001 |
| FSGS | −0.17 | 0.25 | 0.89 | (0.80–0.94) | <0.001 |
| HIVAN | 0.06 | 0.25 | 0.97 | (0.94–0.98) | <0.001 |
| Aging | −0.28 | 0.37 | 0.96 | (0.92–0.98) | <0.001 |
| Progeroid | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.94 | (0.87–0.97) | <0.001 |
| DN | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.57 | (0.35–0.57) | <0.001 |
DN, diabetic nephropathy; FSGS, focal segmental glomerular sclerosis; HIVAN, HIV-associated nephropathy.
PodoCount estimates of corrected podocyte counts were compared against manual ground truth generated using the single-section method. Error in automated counts was bounded by 1 podocyte. Tendency toward over- or underestimation was cohort dependent. Automated counts were strongly and significantly correlated with ground truth counts across all cohorts. Correlation results between automated and ground truth podocyte density estimates were evaluated with parametric Pearson analysis (R2 value and 95% CIs reported, in addition to P values).
Figure 2Comparison of podometric estimates by PodoCount and the single-section method. PodoCount estimates of corrected podocyte count and podocyte density were compared against those from manual ground truth measurements using the single-section method. (a) Error in automated counts was bounded by 1 podocyte. Tendency toward over- or under- estimation was cohort dependent. (b) The modified Bland-Altman plot highlights the departure in PodoCount podocyte density estimates from ground truth. No., number; FSGS (SAND), focal segmental glomerular sclerosis; HIVAN, HIV-associated nephropathy.
Comparison of podocyte density by PodoCount and the single-section method
| Cohort | Comparison of PodoCount automated counts vs. the single-section method | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median error in estimation | Pearson correlation analysis | ||||
| Residual | Absolute | 95% CI for | |||
| db/db | −0.01 | 0.75 | 0.96 | (0.93–0.98) | <0.001 |
| KKAy | −1.88 | 2.18 | 0.92 | (0.85–0.96) | <0.001 |
| FSGS | −1.59 | 2.29 | 0.97 | (0.93–0.98) | <0.001 |
| HIVAN | 0.51 | 1.80 | 0.98 | (0.96–0.99) | <0.001 |
| Aging | −0.93 | 1.38 | 0.97 | (0.95–0.99) | <0.001 |
| Progeroid | 0.59 | 1.59 | 0.94 | (0.88–0.97) | <0.001 |
| DN | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.39 | (0.24–0.48) | <0.001 |
DN, diabetic nephropathy; FSGS, focal segmental glomerular sclerosis; HIVAN, HIV-associated nephropathy.
PodoCount estimates of podocyte density were compared against manual ground truth generated using the single-section method. Absolute error in automated estimates was on average 1.55 (number per 106 μm³). Tendency toward over- or underestimation was cohort dependent. Automated estimates were strongly and significantly correlated with ground truth estimates across all cohorts. Correlation results between automated and ground truth podocyte density estimates were evaluated with parametric Pearson analysis (R2 value and 95% CIs reported, in addition to P values).
Figure 3Podocyte and glomerular morphometrics of control and disease mice across murine models. Distribution of podocyte feature values across disease states with each black dot corresponding to a single mouse in the (a) db/db model of type II diabetes mellitus, (b) KKAy model of type II diabetes mellitus, (c) FSGS model, (d) HIVAN model, (e) Aging model, and (f) Progeroid (Ercc) model. All podometric values are based on 2D quantification from glomerulus profiles in whole kidney sections. ∗q < 0.05. 2D, 2-dimensional; CTRL, control; FSGS, focal segmental glomerular sclerosis; Glom =, glomerulus; HIVAN, HIV-associated nephropathy; Pod, podocyte; WT, wild type.
Podocyte morphometrics significantly differentiated diabetic nephropathy stages IIb and III
| Image feature | Diabetic nephropathy cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage I | Stage IIa | Stage IIb | Stage III | Stage IV | |
| 3 | 6 | 12 | 4 | 20 | |
| PC | 1.09 ± 0.24 | 1.15 ± 0.72 | 1.40 ± 0.56 | 0.52 ± 0.31 | 0.85 ± 0.51 |
| GA | 29660.26 ± 4644.71 | 10085.43 ± 16639.20 | 31116.08 ± 8381.64 | 22629.21 ± 4758.69 | 23256.96 ± 9121.63 |
| GPD | 16.82 ± 3.85 | 19.96 ± 9.79 | 19.89 ± 6.31 | 12.55 ± 8.10 | 17.85 ± 7.91 |
| TPA | 95.76 ± 30.14 | 99.69 ± 70.29 | 155.42 ± 98.43 | 28.34 ± 27.70 | 84.94 ± 86.35 |
| GPC | 3.09 ± 0.65 | 2.82 ± 1.44 | 4.14 ± 2.09 | 0.98 ± 0.80 | 2.73 ± 1.66 |
DN, diabetic nephropathy; GA, glomerular area; GPC, glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage; GPD, glomerular podocyte volume density; n, number of unique patient thin-needle biopsies per DN stage; PC, corrected podocyte count; TPA, total podocyte nuclear area.
Pipeline-computed features were ranked based on their ability to differentiate between DN stages defined by the Tervaert classification scheme. (A) The table summarizes the mean and SD of each feature across Tervaert stages. (B) Corrected podocyte count was the most significant indicator of disease in DN, followed by total podocyte nuclear area and podocyte nuclear coverage. Pairwise tests revealed that differences in podocyte counts and nuclear morphometrics are consistently observed between DN stages IIb and III. Podometric values are based on 2D quantification from glomerulus profiles in whole kidney sections. Feature units: GA, μm2; GPD, number per 106 μm3; TPA, μm2. Statistical conclusions are based on Kruskal–Wallis and post hoc Dunn’s tests comparing population medians at a significance level of 0.05. H0: At least one population mean is different.
q < 0.05.
Biopsy nuclear podocyte pathology is predictive of progression to end-stage kidney disease
| Image feature | Diabetic nephropathy cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feature summary (mean ± SD) | Difference of means (ESKD – no ESKD) | ||||
| No ESKD | ESKD | Difference | 95% CI | ||
| PC | 3.44 ± 1.93 | 1.97 ± 1.05 | −1.47 | (−2.37 to −0.57) | 0.002 |
| GA | 28432.41 ± 9450.26 | 21426.01 ± 5384.96 | −7006.40 | (−11502.52 to −2510.29) | 0.003 |
| GPD | 19.22 ± 7.52 | 15.73 ± 7.38 | −3.49 | (−8.40 to 1.43) | 0.156 |
| TPA | 124.26 ± 95.79 | 50.74 ± 29.88 | −73.52 | (−111.85 to −35.18) | <0.001 |
| GPC | 3.01 ± 2.10 | 2.21 ± 1.31 | −0.80 | (−2.00 to 1.31) | 0.002 |
ESKD, end-stage kidney disease; GA, glomerular area; GPC, glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage; GPD, glomerular podocyte density; PC, corrected podocyte count; TPA, total podocyte nuclear area.
The table summarizes the mean and SD of each feature across patient outcomes. Significant reduction in corrected podocyte count, glomerular area, total podocyte nuclear area, and glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage was characteristic of progressor biopsies. Podometric values are based on 2D quantification from glomerulus profiles in whole kidney sections. Feature units: GA, μm2; GPD, number per 106 μm3; TPA, μm2. Statistical conclusions are based on 2-sample t tests comparing murine population means at a significance level of 0.05.
q < 0.05.
Figure 4Podocyte and glomerular morphometrics in diabetic nephropathy kidney biopsy specimens predict outcome. Distribution of podocyte feature values comparing those with diabetes with progression to ESKD to those without with each black dot corresponding to a single patient (a) or glomerulus (b). All podometric values are based on 2D quantification from glomerulus profiles in whole kidney sections. ∗q < 0.05. 2D, 2-dimensional; ESKD, end-stage kidney disease; Pod, podocyte; Glom, glomerulus.
Nuclear indicators of podocyte pathology may improve patient prognostication from time of biopsy
| Image feature (adjusted for eGFR) | Diabetic nephropathy cohort | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eGFR | Feature | |||||
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| eGFR | 0.75 | 0.58–0.96 | 0.020 | — | — | — |
| eGFR + PC | 0.54 | 0.23–1.29 | 0.167 | 0.91 | (0.83–0.99) | 0.285 |
| eGFR + GA | 0.74 | 0.57–0.96 | 0.021 | 1.43 | (0.34–6.06) | 0.023 |
| eGFR + GPD | 0.69 | 1.01–1.78 | 0.047 | 0.80 | (0.54–1.20) | 0.389 |
| eGFR + TPA | 0.74 | 0.58–0.96 | 0.022 | 0.75 | (0.60–0.95) | 0.018 |
| eGFR + GPC | 0.74 | 0.58–0.95 | 0.022 | 0.89 | (0.31–2.61) | 0.836 |
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate at time of biopsy; ESKD, end-stage kidney disease; GA, glomerulus area; GPC, glomerular podocyte nuclear coverage; GPD, glomerular podocyte density; OR, odds ratio; TPA, total podocyte nuclear area.
Logistic regression models were evaluated for feature-based prediction of patient outcome in diabetic nephropathy. Each pipeline-computed image feature was evaluated in combination with eGFR as predictors of ESKD incidence (response variable). Response frequency was 14 of 45 patients. The values and 95% CIs for odds ratios were reported, in addition to their associated P values. Select image features were rescaled to provide interpretable unit changes in OR, including GA by 1000, GPD by 10, and TPA by 10. Feature units: GA, μm2; GPD, number per 106 μm3; TPA, μm2.
q < 0.05.