Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Targeted genetic profiling of tissue samples is paramount to detect druggable genetic aberrations in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Accurate upfront estimation of tumor cell content (TCC) is a crucial pre-analytical step for reliable testing and to avoid false-negative results. As of now, TCC is usually estimated on hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) stained tissue sections by a pathologist, a methodology that may be prone to substantial intra- and interobserver variability. Here we the investigate suitability of digital pathology for TCC estimation in a clinical setting by evaluating the concordance between semi-automatic and conventional TCC quantification.
Methods: TCC was analyzed in 120 H&E and thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1) stained high-resolution images by 19 participants with different levels of pathological expertise as well as by applying two semi-automatic digital pathology image analysis tools (HALO and QuPath).
Results: Agreement of TCC estimations [intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC)] between the two software tools (H&E: 0.87; TTF-1: 0.93) was higher compared to that between conventional observers (0.48; 0.47). Digital TCC estimations were in good agreement with the average of human TCC estimations (0.78; 0.96). Conventional TCC estimators tended to overestimate TCC, especially in H&E stainings, in tumors with solid patterns and in tumors with an actual TCC close to 50%.
Conclusions: Our results determine factors that influence TCC estimation. Computer-assisted analysis can improve the accuracy of TCC estimates prior to molecular diagnostic workflows. In addition, we provide a free web application to support self-training and quality improvement initiatives at other institutions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8107748 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-20-1168 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!