Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring

Anthony E. Rizzardi, Arthur T. Johnson, Rachel I Vogel, Stefan E. Pambuccian, Jonathan Henriksen, Amy P Skubitz, Greg Metzger, Stephen C. Schmechel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

158 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Immunohistochemical (IHC) assays performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections traditionally have been semi-quantified by pathologist visual scoring of staining. IHC is useful for validating biomarkers discovered through genomics methods as large clinical repositories of FFPE specimens support the construction of tissue microarrays (TMAs) for high throughput studies. Due to the ubiquitous availability of IHC techniques in clinical laboratories, validated IHC biomarkers may be translated readily into clinical use. However, the method of pathologist semi-quantification is costly, inherently subjective, and produces ordinal rather than continuous variable data. Computer-aided analysis of digitized whole slide images may overcome these limitations. Using TMAs representing 215 ovarian serous carcinoma specimens stained for S100A1, we assessed the degree to which data obtained using computer-aided methods correlated with data obtained by pathologist visual scoring. To evaluate computer-aided image classification, IHC staining within pathologist annotated and software-classified areas of carcinoma were compared for each case. Two metrics for IHC staining were used: the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (%Pos), and the product of the staining intensity (optical density [OD] of staining) multiplied by the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (OD*%Pos). A comparison of the IHC staining data obtained from manual annotations and software-derived annotations showed strong agreement, indicating that software efficiently classifies carcinomatous areas within IHC slide images. Comparisons of IHC intensity data derived using pixel analysis software versus pathologist visual scoring demonstrated high Spearman correlations of 0.88 for %Pos (p < 0.0001) and 0.90 for OD*%Pos (p < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that computer-aided methods to classify image areas of interest (e.g., carcinomatous areas of tissue specimens) and quantify IHC staining intensity within those areas can produce highly similar data to visual evaluation by a pathologist.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number42
JournalDiagnostic Pathology
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 19 2012

Fingerprint

Staining and Labeling
Software
Carcinoma
Paraffin
Formaldehyde
Biomarkers
Pathologists
Clinical Laboratory Techniques
Genomics
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Annotation
  • Color deconvolution
  • Digital pathology
  • Immunohistochemistry
  • Intensity
  • Quantification
  • Software

Cite this

Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring. / Rizzardi, Anthony E.; Johnson, Arthur T.; Vogel, Rachel I; Pambuccian, Stefan E.; Henriksen, Jonathan; Skubitz, Amy P; Metzger, Greg; Schmechel, Stephen C.

In: Diagnostic Pathology, Vol. 7, No. 1, 42, 19.04.2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rizzardi, Anthony E. ; Johnson, Arthur T. ; Vogel, Rachel I ; Pambuccian, Stefan E. ; Henriksen, Jonathan ; Skubitz, Amy P ; Metzger, Greg ; Schmechel, Stephen C. / Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring. In: Diagnostic Pathology. 2012 ; Vol. 7, No. 1.
@article{f6ad4d2e51af49daa6adf0a17c5085d3,
title = "Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring",
abstract = "Immunohistochemical (IHC) assays performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections traditionally have been semi-quantified by pathologist visual scoring of staining. IHC is useful for validating biomarkers discovered through genomics methods as large clinical repositories of FFPE specimens support the construction of tissue microarrays (TMAs) for high throughput studies. Due to the ubiquitous availability of IHC techniques in clinical laboratories, validated IHC biomarkers may be translated readily into clinical use. However, the method of pathologist semi-quantification is costly, inherently subjective, and produces ordinal rather than continuous variable data. Computer-aided analysis of digitized whole slide images may overcome these limitations. Using TMAs representing 215 ovarian serous carcinoma specimens stained for S100A1, we assessed the degree to which data obtained using computer-aided methods correlated with data obtained by pathologist visual scoring. To evaluate computer-aided image classification, IHC staining within pathologist annotated and software-classified areas of carcinoma were compared for each case. Two metrics for IHC staining were used: the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining ({\%}Pos), and the product of the staining intensity (optical density [OD] of staining) multiplied by the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (OD*{\%}Pos). A comparison of the IHC staining data obtained from manual annotations and software-derived annotations showed strong agreement, indicating that software efficiently classifies carcinomatous areas within IHC slide images. Comparisons of IHC intensity data derived using pixel analysis software versus pathologist visual scoring demonstrated high Spearman correlations of 0.88 for {\%}Pos (p < 0.0001) and 0.90 for OD*{\%}Pos (p < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that computer-aided methods to classify image areas of interest (e.g., carcinomatous areas of tissue specimens) and quantify IHC staining intensity within those areas can produce highly similar data to visual evaluation by a pathologist.",
keywords = "Annotation, Color deconvolution, Digital pathology, Immunohistochemistry, Intensity, Quantification, Software",
author = "Rizzardi, {Anthony E.} and Johnson, {Arthur T.} and Vogel, {Rachel I} and Pambuccian, {Stefan E.} and Jonathan Henriksen and Skubitz, {Amy P} and Greg Metzger and Schmechel, {Stephen C.}",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1186/1746-1596-7-42",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
journal = "Diagnostic Pathology",
issn = "1746-1596",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring

AU - Rizzardi, Anthony E.

AU - Johnson, Arthur T.

AU - Vogel, Rachel I

AU - Pambuccian, Stefan E.

AU - Henriksen, Jonathan

AU - Skubitz, Amy P

AU - Metzger, Greg

AU - Schmechel, Stephen C.

PY - 2012/4/19

Y1 - 2012/4/19

N2 - Immunohistochemical (IHC) assays performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections traditionally have been semi-quantified by pathologist visual scoring of staining. IHC is useful for validating biomarkers discovered through genomics methods as large clinical repositories of FFPE specimens support the construction of tissue microarrays (TMAs) for high throughput studies. Due to the ubiquitous availability of IHC techniques in clinical laboratories, validated IHC biomarkers may be translated readily into clinical use. However, the method of pathologist semi-quantification is costly, inherently subjective, and produces ordinal rather than continuous variable data. Computer-aided analysis of digitized whole slide images may overcome these limitations. Using TMAs representing 215 ovarian serous carcinoma specimens stained for S100A1, we assessed the degree to which data obtained using computer-aided methods correlated with data obtained by pathologist visual scoring. To evaluate computer-aided image classification, IHC staining within pathologist annotated and software-classified areas of carcinoma were compared for each case. Two metrics for IHC staining were used: the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (%Pos), and the product of the staining intensity (optical density [OD] of staining) multiplied by the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (OD*%Pos). A comparison of the IHC staining data obtained from manual annotations and software-derived annotations showed strong agreement, indicating that software efficiently classifies carcinomatous areas within IHC slide images. Comparisons of IHC intensity data derived using pixel analysis software versus pathologist visual scoring demonstrated high Spearman correlations of 0.88 for %Pos (p < 0.0001) and 0.90 for OD*%Pos (p < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that computer-aided methods to classify image areas of interest (e.g., carcinomatous areas of tissue specimens) and quantify IHC staining intensity within those areas can produce highly similar data to visual evaluation by a pathologist.

AB - Immunohistochemical (IHC) assays performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections traditionally have been semi-quantified by pathologist visual scoring of staining. IHC is useful for validating biomarkers discovered through genomics methods as large clinical repositories of FFPE specimens support the construction of tissue microarrays (TMAs) for high throughput studies. Due to the ubiquitous availability of IHC techniques in clinical laboratories, validated IHC biomarkers may be translated readily into clinical use. However, the method of pathologist semi-quantification is costly, inherently subjective, and produces ordinal rather than continuous variable data. Computer-aided analysis of digitized whole slide images may overcome these limitations. Using TMAs representing 215 ovarian serous carcinoma specimens stained for S100A1, we assessed the degree to which data obtained using computer-aided methods correlated with data obtained by pathologist visual scoring. To evaluate computer-aided image classification, IHC staining within pathologist annotated and software-classified areas of carcinoma were compared for each case. Two metrics for IHC staining were used: the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (%Pos), and the product of the staining intensity (optical density [OD] of staining) multiplied by the percentage of carcinoma with S100A1 staining (OD*%Pos). A comparison of the IHC staining data obtained from manual annotations and software-derived annotations showed strong agreement, indicating that software efficiently classifies carcinomatous areas within IHC slide images. Comparisons of IHC intensity data derived using pixel analysis software versus pathologist visual scoring demonstrated high Spearman correlations of 0.88 for %Pos (p < 0.0001) and 0.90 for OD*%Pos (p < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that computer-aided methods to classify image areas of interest (e.g., carcinomatous areas of tissue specimens) and quantify IHC staining intensity within those areas can produce highly similar data to visual evaluation by a pathologist.

KW - Annotation

KW - Color deconvolution

KW - Digital pathology

KW - Immunohistochemistry

KW - Intensity

KW - Quantification

KW - Software

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863879050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863879050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1746-1596-7-42

DO - 10.1186/1746-1596-7-42

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - Diagnostic Pathology

JF - Diagnostic Pathology

SN - 1746-1596

IS - 1

M1 - 42

ER -