Abstract
Recent progress in computational pathology has been driven by deep learning. While code and data availability are essential to reproduce findings from preceding publications, ensuring a deep learning model’s reusability is more challenging. For that, the codebase should be well-documented and easy to integrate in existing workflows, and models should be robust towards noise and generalizable towards data from different sources. Strikingly, only a few computational pathology algorithms have been reused by other researchers so far, let alone employed in a clinical setting.
To assess the current state of reproducibility and reusability of computational pathology algorithms, we evaluated peer-reviewed articles available in Pubmed, published between January 2019 and March 2021, in five use cases: stain normalization, tissue type segmentation, evaluation of cell-level features, genetic alteration prediction, and direct extraction of grading, staging, and prognostic information. We compiled criteria for data and code availability, and for statistical result analysis and assessed them in 161 publications. We found that only one quarter (42 out of 161 publications) made code publicly available and thus fulfilled our minimum requirement for reproducibility and reusability. Among these 42 papers, three quarters (30 out of 42) analyzed their results statistically, less than half (20 out of 42) have released their trained model weights, and only about a third (16 out of 42) used an independent cohort for evaluation.
This review highlights candidates for reproducible and reusable algorithms in computational pathology. It is intended for both pathologists interested in deep learning, and researchers applying deep learning algorithms to computational pathology challenges. We provide a list of reusable data handling tools and a detailed overview of the publications together with our criteria for reproducibility and reusability.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
S.J.W., L.L., and S.S.B. are supported by the Helmholtz Association under the joint research school "Munich School for Data Science - MUDS". C.M. has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Grant agreement No. 866411).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos