Health equity assessment of machine learning performance (HEAL): a framework and dermatology AI model case study.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has repeatedly been shown to encode historical inequities in healthcare. We aimed to develop a framework to quantitatively assess the performance equity of health AI technologies and to illustrate its utility via a case study. Methods: Here, we propose a methodology to assess whether health AI technologies prioritise performance for patient populations experiencing worse outcomes, that is complementary to existing fairness metrics. We developed the Health Equity Assessment of machine Learning performance (HEAL) framework designed to quantitatively assess the performance equity of health AI technologies via a four-step interdisciplinary process to understand and quantify domain-specific criteria, and the resulting HEAL metric. As an illustrative case study (analysis conducted between October 2022 and January 2023), we applied the HEAL framework to a dermatology AI model. A set of 5420 teledermatology cases (store-and-forward cases from patients of 20 years or older, submitted from primary care providers in the USA and skin cancer clinics in Australia), enriched for diversity in age, sex and race/ethnicity, was used to retrospectively evaluate the AI model's HEAL metric, defined as the likelihood that the AI model performs better for subpopulations with worse average health outcomes as compared to others. The likelihood that AI performance was anticorrelated to pre-existing health outcomes was estimated using bootstrap methods as the probability that the negated Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (i.e., "R") was greater than zero. Positive values of R suggest that subpopulations with poorer health outcomes have better AI model performance. Thus, the HEAL metric, defined as p (R >0), measures how likely the AI technology is to prioritise performance for subpopulations with worse average health outcomes as compared to others (presented as a percentage below). Health outcomes were quantified as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) when grouping by sex and age, and years of life lost (YLLs) when grouping by race/ethnicity. AI performance was measured as top-3 agreement with the reference diagnosis from a panel of 3 dermatologists per case. Findings: Across all dermatologic conditions, the HEAL metric was 80.5% for prioritizing AI performance of racial/ethnic subpopulations based on YLLs, and 92.1% and 0.0% respectively for prioritizing AI performance of sex and age subpopulations based on DALYs. Certain dermatologic conditions were significantly associated with greater AI model performance compared to a reference category of less common conditions. For skin cancer conditions, the HEAL metric was 73.8% for prioritizing AI performance of age subpopulations based on DALYs. Interpretation: Analysis using the proposed HEAL framework showed that the dermatology AI model prioritised performance for race/ethnicity, sex (all conditions) and age (cancer conditions) subpopulations with respect to pre-existing health disparities. More work is needed to investigate ways of promoting equitable AI performance across age for non-cancer conditions and to better understand how AI models can contribute towards improving equity in health outcomes. Funding: Google LLC.

Deep learning models for histologic grading of breast cancer and association with disease prognosis.

Histologic grading of breast cancer involves review and scoring of three well-established morphologic features: mitotic count, nuclear pleomorphism, and tubule formation. Taken together, these features form the basis of the Nottingham Grading System which is used to inform breast cancer characterization and prognosis. In this study, we develop deep learning models to perform histologic scoring of all three components using digitized hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides containing invasive breast carcinoma. We first evaluate model performance using pathologist-based reference standards for each component. To complement this typical approach to evaluation, we further evaluate the deep learning models via prognostic analyses. The individual component models perform at or above published benchmarks for algorithm-based grading approaches, achieving high concordance rates with pathologist grading. Further, prognostic performance using deep learning-based grading is on par with that of pathologists performing review of matched slides. By providing scores for each component feature, the deep-learning based approach also provides the potential to identify the grading components contributing most to prognostic value. This may enable optimized prognostic models, opportunities to improve access to consistent grading, and approaches to better understand the links between histologic features and clinical outcomes in breast cancer.

Determining breast cancer biomarker status and associated morphological features using deep learning.

Background: Breast cancer management depends on biomarkers including estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ER/PR/HER2). Though existing scoring systems are widely used and well-validated, they can involve costly preparation and variable interpretation. Additionally, discordances between histology and expected biomarker findings can prompt repeat testing to address biological, interpretative, or technical reasons for unexpected results. Methods: We developed three independent deep learning systems (DLS) to directly predict ER/PR/HER2 status for both focal tissue regions (patches) and slides using hematoxylin-and-eosin-stained (H&E) images as input. Models were trained and evaluated using pathologist annotated slides from three data sources. Areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUCs) were calculated for test sets at both a patch-level (>135 million patches, 181 slides) and slide-level (n = 3274 slides, 1249 cases, 37 sites). Interpretability analyses were performed using Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV), saliency analysis, and pathologist review of clustered patches. Results: The patch-level AUCs are 0.939 (95%CI 0.936-0.941), 0.938 (0.936-0.940), and 0.808 (0.802-0.813) for ER/PR/HER2, respectively. At the slide level, AUCs are 0.86 (95%CI 0.84-0.87), 0.75 (0.73-0.77), and 0.60 (0.56-0.64) for ER/PR/HER2, respectively. Interpretability analyses show known biomarker-histomorphology associations including associations of low-grade and lobular histology with ER/PR positivity, and increased inflammatory infiltrates with triple-negative staining. Conclusions: This study presents rapid breast cancer biomarker estimation from routine H&E slides and builds on prior advances by prioritizing interpretability of computationally learned features in the context of existing pathological knowledge.

Current and future applications of artificial intelligence in pathology: a clinical perspective.

During the last decade, a dramatic rise in the development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for use in pathology services has occurred. This trend is often expected to continue and reshape the field of pathology in the coming years. The deployment of computational pathology and applications of AI tools can be considered as a paradigm shift that will change pathology services, making them more efficient and capable of meeting the needs of this era of precision medicine. Despite the success of AI models, the translational process from discovery to clinical applications has been slow. The gap between self-contained research and clinical environment may be too wide and has been largely neglected. In this review, we cover the current and prospective applications of AI in pathology. We examine its applications in diagnosis and prognosis, and we offer insights for considerations that could improve clinical applicability of these tools. Then, we discuss its potential to improve workflow efficiency, and its benefits in pathologist education. Finally, we review the factors that could influence adoption in clinical practices and the associated regulatory processes.

Artificial intelligence in digital breast pathology: Techniques and applications.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The mainstay of breast cancer workup is histopathological diagnosis - which guides therapy and prognosis. However, emerging knowledge about the complex nature of cancer and the availability of tailored therapies have exposed opportunities for improvements in diagnostic precision. In parallel, advances in artificial intelligence (AI) along with the growing digitization of pathology slides for the primary diagnosis are a promising approach to meet the demand for more accurate detection, classification and prediction of behaviour of breast tumours. In this article, we cover the current and prospective uses of AI in digital pathology for breast cancer, review the basics of digital pathology and AI, and outline outstanding challenges in the field.