Cooper, Lee

ABSTRACT Meningiomas are the most common primary brain tumors and, despite their benign reputation, often behave aggressively. Meningiomas are morphologically heterogeneous, yet the full significance of their histologic diversity is unclear. This is in large part because many features are not readily quantifiable by traditional observer-based light microscopy. Molecular testing improves prognostic stratification, but is not universally accessible. We therefore sought to determine whether an artificial intelligence (AI)-trained program could predict specific genomic and epigenomic patterns in meningiomas, and whether it could extract more prognostic information out of standard hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) histopathology than the current WHO classification. To do this, we developed Morphologic Set Enrichment (MSE), an interpretable computational pathology framework that quantifies statistical enrichment of morphologic patterns, cells, and tissue architecture from H&E whole-slide images. The MSE meningioma histology program was able to accurately predict DNA methylation subtypes and concurrent chromosome 1p/22q losses, in the process identifying specific morphologic patterns associated with key genomic and epigenomic alterations. It also added prognostic value independent of standard clinical and pathological variables. These results demonstrate that AI-based quantitative morphologic profiling can capture clinically and biologically relevant information that redefines risk stratification for meningiomas, incorporating histological information not included in existing grading schemes.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Glioblastoma is the most common malignant adult brain tumor with poor prognosis, largely due to its heterogeneous landscape. The AI-RANO and RANO-RGP groups organized the BraTS-Pathology 2024 challenge, providing a publicly-available dataset and a benchmarking environment for AI models to automatically identify six clinically-relevant histopathologic sub-regions in H&E-stained whole slide images (WSIs). METHODS We reclassified the TCGA-GBM and TCGA-LGG data according to the WHO 2021 criteria and identified diagnostic WSIs of 188 glioblastoma (IDH-wt, CNS WHO Gr.4) patients. A well-defined annotation protocol was communicated to eight neuropathologists, across eight institutions, who created “ground truth” annotations for Cellular Tumor (CT), Geographic Necrosis, Cortical Infiltration, Pseudopalisading Necrosis (PN), Microvascular Proliferation, and Penetration into White Matter (PWM). Comprehensive WSI curation for elimination of artifactual content and follow up partitioning resulted in approximately 300,000 data samples/patches. FINDINGS Inter-observer variability assessment highlighted difficulties in establishing a “gold standard”. The least annotated sub-regions (PWM and PN) were the most challenging to the participating methods, whereas all methods achieved their highest accuracy in the most annotated sub-region (CT). The highest average performance across sub-regions was obtained by a foundation model-based method. However, this top-ranked solution achieved an F1 score of 0.51 (Accuracy=0.65, Sensitivity=0.56, Specificity=0.93). CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that achieving state-of-the-art performance, in automatically identifying clinically-relevant glioblastoma sub-regions, remains an unsolved research problem. Analysis of the ground-truth annotations underscores the critical need for more precisely defined and neuropathologically standardized annotation protocol. Current AI algorithms are facing difficulties in addressing glioblastoma’s heterogeneous histologic landscape in the absence of large, comprehensively, and consistently annotated data. Building upon these findings, and towards developing more accurate AI algorithms, the 2025 iteration of the BraTS-Path challenge is currently on-going by leveraging two million data samples, aiming to enhance our disease understanding and improve diagnostic accuracy, ultimately contributing to improved patient outcomes.

Abstract Glioblastoma, the most common malignant primary adult brain tumor, poses significant diagnostic and treatment challenges due to its heterogeneous molecular and micro-environmental profiles. To this end, we organize the BraTS-Path challenge to provide a public benchmarking environment and a comprehensive dataset to develop and validate AI models for identifying distinct histopathologic glioblastoma sub-regions in H&E-stained digitized tissue sections. We identified 188 multi-institutional diagnostic slides of glioblastoma (IDH-wt, Gr.4) cases, from the TCGA-GBM and TCGA-LGG data collections, following their reclassification according to the 2021 WHO classification criteria. Sub-regions were selected according to distinctive morphology of histopathologic features and included aggressive tumor biology and areas consistent with potential treatment effect. Selected sub-region annotations included cellular tumor, geographic necrosis, cortical infiltration, pseudopalisading necrosis, microvascular proliferation, white matter penetration, regions dense with macrophages, leptomeningeal infiltration, and presence of lymphocytes. We obtained 107,340 patches of size 512x512 from the 9 sub-regions. A global network of board-certified expert neuropathologists defined and followed a systematic annotation protocol based on clinical definitions and only delineated sub-regions with high confidence, thus ensuring high-quality standardized data. Each tissue section was assigned to an annotator-approver pair, with the annotator delineating sub-regions and the approver ensuring the consistency of the annotations. By crowdsourcing annotations, the BraTS-Path challenge harnesses the collective expertise of clinical neuropathologists and fosters a collaborative environment to advance the neuro-oncology field. The anticipated developed algorithms are expected to integrate state-of-the-art computational methods, achieving high accuracy in identifying diverse histopathologic features and advancing clinical decision-making processes. The BraTS-Path challenge aims to bridge the gap between research and clinical practice by promoting the development of AI-driven tools for precise tumor characterization. This collaborative effort can significantly enhance our understanding of glioblastoma, improve diagnostic accuracy, and inform treatment strategies, thereby contributing to better patient outcomes.

Abstract Recent advances in the field of immuno‐oncology have brought transformative changes in the management of cancer patients. The immune profile of tumours has been found to have key value in predicting disease prognosis and treatment response in various cancers. Multiplex immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence have emerged as potent tools for the simultaneous detection of multiple protein biomarkers in a single tissue section, thereby expanding opportunities for molecular and immune profiling while preserving tissue samples. By establishing the phenotype of individual tumour cells when distributed within a mixed cell population, the identification of clinically relevant biomarkers with high‐throughput multiplex immunophenotyping of tumour samples has great potential to guide appropriate treatment choices. Moreover, the emergence of novel multi‐marker imaging approaches can now provide unprecedented insights into the tumour microenvironment, including the potential interplay between various cell types. However, there are significant challenges to widespread integration of these technologies in daily research and clinical practice. This review addresses the challenges and potential solutions within a structured framework of action from a regulatory and clinical trial perspective. New developments within the field of immunophenotyping using multiplexed tissue imaging platforms and associated digital pathology are also described, with a specific focus on translational implications across different subtypes of cancer. © 2024 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Abstract Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector‐based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well‐described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

AbstractThe clinical significance of the tumor‐immune interaction in breast cancer is now established, and tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have emerged as predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with triple‐negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2‐negative) breast cancer and HER2‐positive breast cancer. How computational assessments of TILs might complement manual TIL assessment in trial and daily practices is currently debated. Recent efforts to use machine learning (ML) to automatically evaluate TILs have shown promising results. We review state‐of‐the‐art approaches and identify pitfalls and challenges of automated TIL evaluation by studying the root cause of ML discordances in comparison to manual TIL quantification. We categorize our findings into four main topics: (1) technical slide issues, (2) ML and image analysis aspects, (3) data challenges, and (4) validation issues. The main reason for discordant assessments is the inclusion of false‐positive areas or cells identified by performance on certain tissue patterns or design choices in the computational implementation. To aid the adoption of ML for TIL assessment, we provide an in‐depth discussion of ML and image analysis, including validation issues that need to be considered before reliable computational reporting of TILs can be incorporated into the trial and routine clinical management of patients with triple‐negative breast cancer. © 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.