Weakly Supervised AI for Efficient Analysis of 3D Pathology Samples

Human tissue and its constituent cells form a microenvironment that is fundamentally three-dimensional (3D). However, the standard-of-care in pathologic diagnosis involves selecting a few two-dimensional (2D) sections for microscopic evaluation, risking sampling bias and misdiagnosis. Diverse methods for capturing 3D tissue morphologies have been developed, but they have yet had little translation to clinical practice; manual and computational evaluations of such large 3D data have so far been impractical and/or unable to provide patient-level clinical insights. Here we present Modality-Agnostic Multiple instance learning for volumetric Block Analysis (MAMBA), a deep-learning-based platform for processing 3D tissue images from diverse imaging modalities and predicting patient outcomes. Archived prostate cancer specimens were imaged with open-top light-sheet microscopy or microcomputed tomography and the resulting 3D datasets were used to train risk-stratification networks based on 5-year biochemical recurrence outcomes via MAMBA. With the 3D block-based approach, MAMBA achieves an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.86 and 0.74, superior to 2D traditional single-slice-based prognostication (AUC of 0.79 and 0.57), suggesting superior prognostication with 3D morphological features. Further analyses reveal that the incorporation of greater tissue volume improves prognostic performance and mitigates risk prediction variability from sampling bias, suggesting the value of capturing larger extents of heterogeneous 3D morphology. With the rapid growth and adoption of 3D spatial biology and pathology techniques by researchers and clinicians, MAMBA provides a general and efficient framework for 3D weakly supervised learning for clinical decision support and can help to reveal novel 3D morphological biomarkers for prognosis and therapeutic response.

[1]  Jonathan T. C. Liu,et al.  Nondestructive 3D pathology with analysis of nuclear features for prostate cancer risk assessment , 2023, The Journal of pathology.

[2]  James Y. Zou,et al.  Blinded, randomized trial of sonographer versus AI cardiac function assessment , 2023, Nature.

[3]  Jakob Nikolas Kather,et al.  Multistain deep learning for prediction of prognosis and therapy response in colorectal cancer , 2023, Nature Medicine.

[4]  L. Wood,et al.  Tissue clearing and 3D reconstruction of digitized, serially sectioned slides provide novel insights into pancreatic cancer. , 2023, Med.

[5]  Cody N. Heiser,et al.  Multiplexed 3D atlas of state transitions and immune interaction in colorectal cancer , 2023, Cell.

[6]  L. Wood,et al.  CODA: quantitative 3D reconstruction of large tissues at cellular resolution , 2022, Nature Methods.

[7]  Jeong Hwan Park,et al.  Derivation of prognostic contextual histopathological features from whole-slide images of tumours via graph deep learning. , 2022, Nature biomedical engineering.

[8]  Michael Y. Gerner,et al.  A hybrid open-top light-sheet microscope for versatile multi-scale imaging of cleared tissues , 2022, Nature Methods.

[9]  E. Hillman,et al.  High-speed light-sheet microscopy for the in-situ acquisition of volumetric histological images of living tissue , 2022, Nature Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  Lihong V. Wang,et al.  The emerging role of photoacoustic imaging in clinical oncology , 2022, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Anders S. Johansen,et al.  Video Transformers: A Survey , 2022, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[12]  Po-Hsuan Cameron Chen,et al.  Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer: the PANDA challenge , 2022, Nature Medicine.

[13]  Jonathan T. C. Liu,et al.  Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification via Nondestructive 3D Pathology with Deep Learning–Assisted Gland Analysis , 2021, Cancer Research.

[14]  B. Landman,et al.  Self-Supervised Pre-Training of Swin Transformers for 3D Medical Image Analysis , 2021, 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[15]  J. Klode,et al.  High-resolution three-dimensional imaging for precise staging in melanoma. , 2021, European journal of cancer.

[16]  Stephen Lin,et al.  Video Swin Transformer , 2021, 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[17]  G. Litjens,et al.  Deep learning in histopathology: the path to the clinic , 2021, Nature Medicine.

[18]  Jonathan T. C. Liu,et al.  Harnessing non-destructive 3D pathology , 2021, Nature Biomedical Engineering.

[19]  R. Socher,et al.  Deep learning-enabled medical computer vision , 2021, npj Digital Medicine.

[20]  Adler J. Perotte,et al.  X-CAL: Explicit Calibration for Survival Analysis , 2020, NeurIPS.

[21]  Ming Y. Lu,et al.  AI-based pathology predicts origins for cancers of unknown primary , 2020, Nature.

[22]  C. Lippert,et al.  3D Self-Supervised Methods for Medical Imaging , 2020, NeurIPS.

[23]  Adam K. Glaser,et al.  FalseColor-Python: A rapid intensity-leveling and digital-staining package for fluorescence-based slide-free digital pathology , 2020, bioRxiv.

[24]  Jared A. Dunnmon,et al.  PENet—a scalable deep-learning model for automated diagnosis of pulmonary embolism using volumetric CT imaging , 2020, NPJ Digital Medicine.

[25]  Ming Y. Lu,et al.  Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images , 2020, Nature Biomedical Engineering.

[26]  Curtis P. Langlotz,et al.  Video-based AI for beat-to-beat assessment of cardiac function , 2020, Nature.

[27]  Marius Pachitariu,et al.  Cellpose: a generalist algorithm for cellular segmentation , 2020, Nature Methods.

[28]  B. van Ginneken,et al.  Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study. , 2020, The Lancet. Oncology.

[29]  David S. Melnick,et al.  International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening , 2020, Nature.

[30]  Jiye G. Kim,et al.  Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using annotation-efficient deep learning approach , 2019, ArXiv.

[31]  Oliver J. Larkin,et al.  X-ray Micro-Computed Tomography for Nondestructive Three-Dimensional (3D) X-ray Histology , 2019, The American journal of pathology.

[32]  Thomas J. Fuchs,et al.  Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images , 2019, Nature Medicine.

[33]  Lawrence D. True,et al.  Multi-immersion open-top light-sheet microscope for high-throughput imaging of cleared tissues , 2019, Nature Communications.

[34]  H. Woodrow,et al.  : A Review of the , 2018 .

[35]  Max Welling,et al.  Attention-based Deep Multiple Instance Learning , 2018, ICML.

[36]  Yann LeCun,et al.  A Closer Look at Spatiotemporal Convolutions for Action Recognition , 2017, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[37]  K. Deisseroth,et al.  Whole-tissue biopsy phenotyping of three-dimensional tumours reveals patterns of cancer heterogeneity , 2017, Nature Biomedical Engineering.

[38]  Mark S. Litwin,et al.  The Diagnosis and Treatment of Prostate Cancer: A Review , 2017, JAMA.

[39]  Lawrence D. True,et al.  Light-sheet microscopy for slide-free non-destructive pathology of large clinical specimens , 2017, Nature Biomedical Engineering.

[40]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Quo Vadis, Action Recognition? A New Model and the Kinetics Dataset , 2017, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[41]  Ankur Taly,et al.  Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networks , 2017, ICML.

[42]  Stephen A. Boppart,et al.  Stain-free histopathology by programmable supercontinuum pulses , 2016, Nature Photonics.

[43]  Konstantinos Kamnitsas,et al.  Efficient multi‐scale 3D CNN with fully connected CRF for accurate brain lesion segmentation , 2016, Medical Image Anal..

[44]  Navid Farahani,et al.  whole slide imaging in pathology: advantages, limitations, and emerging perspectives , 2015 .

[45]  R. Barakat,et al.  Pathologic Ultrastaging Improves Micrometastasis Detection in Sentinel Lymph Nodes During Endometrial Cancer Staging , 2013, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[46]  P. Carroll,et al.  A Model for the Design and Construction of a Resource for the Validation of Prognostic Prostate Cancer Biomarkers: The Canary Prostate Cancer Tissue Microarray , 2013, Advances in anatomic pathology.

[47]  Darren Treanor,et al.  Toward routine use of 3D histopathology as a research tool. , 2012, The American journal of pathology.

[48]  J. Lewis,et al.  Frozen section analysis of margins for head and neck tumor resections: reduction of sampling errors with a third histologic level , 2011, Modern Pathology.

[49]  Michal Kozubek,et al.  Generation of digital phantoms of cell nuclei and simulation of image formation in 3D image cytometry , 2009, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[50]  Ralf Bender,et al.  Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[51]  F. Del Bene,et al.  Optical Sectioning Deep Inside Live Embryos by Selective Plane Illumination Microscopy , 2004, Science.

[52]  E. Ritman Micro-computed tomography-current status and developments. , 2004, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[53]  C. King,et al.  Prostate biopsy grading errors: A sampling problem? , 2000, International journal of cancer.

[54]  J M Carazo,et al.  3D reconstruction in electron microscopy using ART with smooth spherically symmetric volume elements (blobs). , 1998, Ultramicroscopy.

[55]  B. F. Logan,et al.  The Fourier reconstruction of a head section , 1974 .

[56]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[57]  C. Crum,et al.  The impact of tissue block sampling on the detection of p53 signatures in fallopian tubes from women with BRCA 1 or 2 mutations (BRCA+) and controls , 2011, Modern Pathology.