Hanna Pulaski, Stephen A. Harrison, Shraddha S. Mehta, Arun J. Sanyal, Marlena C. Vitali, Laryssa C. Manigat, Hypatia Hou, Susan P. Madasu Christudoss, Sara M. Hoffman, Adam Stanford-Moore, Robert Egger, Jonathan Glickman, Murray Resnick, Neel Patel, Cristin E. Taylor, Robert P. Myers, Chuhan Chung, Scott D. Patterson, Anne-Sophie Sejling, Anne Minnich, Vipul Baxi, G. Mani Subramaniam, Quentin M. Anstee, Rohit Loomba, Vlad Ratziu, Michael C. Montalto, Nick P. Anderson, Andrew H. Beck, Katy E. Wack
{"title":"Clinical validation of an AI-based pathology tool for scoring of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis","authors":"Hanna Pulaski, Stephen A. Harrison, Shraddha S. Mehta, Arun J. Sanyal, Marlena C. Vitali, Laryssa C. Manigat, Hypatia Hou, Susan P. Madasu Christudoss, Sara M. Hoffman, Adam Stanford-Moore, Robert Egger, Jonathan Glickman, Murray Resnick, Neel Patel, Cristin E. Taylor, Robert P. Myers, Chuhan Chung, Scott D. Patterson, Anne-Sophie Sejling, Anne Minnich, Vipul Baxi, G. Mani Subramaniam, Quentin M. Anstee, Rohit Loomba, Vlad Ratziu, Michael C. Montalto, Nick P. Anderson, Andrew H. Beck, Katy E. Wack","doi":"10.1038/s41591-024-03301-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality, yet treatment options are limited. Manual scoring of liver biopsies, currently the gold standard for clinical trial enrollment and endpoint assessment, suffers from high reader variability. This study represents the most comprehensive multisite analytical and clinical validation of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based pathology system, AI-based measurement of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (AIM-MASH), to assist pathologists in MASH trial histology scoring. AIM-MASH demonstrated high repeatability and reproducibility compared to manual scoring. AIM-MASH-assisted reads by expert MASH pathologists were superior to unassisted reads in accurately assessing inflammation, ballooning, MAS ≥ 4 with ≥1 in each score category and MASH resolution, while maintaining non-inferiority in steatosis and fibrosis assessment. These findings suggest that AIM-MASH could mitigate reader variability, providing a more reliable assessment of therapeutics in MASH clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":19037,"journal":{"name":"Nature Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":58.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-03301-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality, yet treatment options are limited. Manual scoring of liver biopsies, currently the gold standard for clinical trial enrollment and endpoint assessment, suffers from high reader variability. This study represents the most comprehensive multisite analytical and clinical validation of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based pathology system, AI-based measurement of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (AIM-MASH), to assist pathologists in MASH trial histology scoring. AIM-MASH demonstrated high repeatability and reproducibility compared to manual scoring. AIM-MASH-assisted reads by expert MASH pathologists were superior to unassisted reads in accurately assessing inflammation, ballooning, MAS ≥ 4 with ≥1 in each score category and MASH resolution, while maintaining non-inferiority in steatosis and fibrosis assessment. These findings suggest that AIM-MASH could mitigate reader variability, providing a more reliable assessment of therapeutics in MASH clinical trials.
期刊介绍:
Nature Medicine is a monthly journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all areas of medicine. The publication focuses on originality, timeliness, interdisciplinary interest, and the impact on improving human health. In addition to research articles, Nature Medicine also publishes commissioned content such as News, Reviews, and Perspectives. This content aims to provide context for the latest advances in translational and clinical research, reaching a wide audience of M.D. and Ph.D. readers. All editorial decisions for the journal are made by a team of full-time professional editors.
Nature Medicine consider all types of clinical research, including:
-Case-reports and small case series
-Clinical trials, whether phase 1, 2, 3 or 4
-Observational studies
-Meta-analyses
-Biomarker studies
-Public and global health studies
Nature Medicine is also committed to facilitating communication between translational and clinical researchers. As such, we consider “hybrid” studies with preclinical and translational findings reported alongside data from clinical studies.