Back

Deep Learning Tissue Analysis Diagnoses And Predicts Treatment Response In Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Javaid, A.; Fernandes, P.; Adorno, W.; Catalano, A.; Ehsan, L.; Vizthum von Eckstaedt, H.; Khan, M.; Raghavan, S. S.; McGowan, E.; Barnes, B.; Moskaluk, C. A.; Collins, M. H.; Rothenberg, M. E.; Brown, D. E.; Syed, S.

2021-06-16 gastroenterology
10.1101/2021.06.10.21258624 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundEosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition diagnosed by [&ge;]15 eosinophils (Eos) per high-power field (HPF). There is no gold standard for clinical remission and Eo-associated metrics are poorly correlated with symptoms. Deep learning can be used to explore the relationships of tissue features with clinical response. ObjectivesTo determine if deep learning can elucidate tissue patterns in EoE that predict treatments or symptoms at remission. MethodsWe created two deep learning models using esophageal biopsies from histologically normal and EoE patients: one to identify Eos in esophageal biopsies and a second to broadly classify esophageal tissue as EoE vs. normal. We used these models to analyze biopsies at diagnosis and first remission timepoint, as defined by <15 Eos/HPF, in a subset of 19 treatment-naive patients. Differences in deep learning metrics between patient groups were assessed using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests. ResultsAll initial patients were symptomatic at diagnosis and a majority were still suffering from dysphagia at remission. The Eo identification model had a low mean (SD) error of -0.3 (11.5) Eos/HPF. Higher peak and average Eo counts at diagnosis were associated with higher likelihood of being on a food-elimination diet at remission than steroids or proton-pump inhibitor (p<0.05). The EoE classification model had an F1-score of 0.97 for distinguishing normal tissue from EoE. There was a significant decrease from diagnosis in the percentage of EoE-classified tissue among asymptomatic remission patients (p<0.05). ConclusionsDeep learning may have utility in diagnosing EoE and predicting future treatment response at diagnosis and resolution of symptoms at follow-up. Clinical Implications or Key Messages (for mechanistic article)We developed two deep learning approaches for tissue analysis in eosinophilic esophagitis, which may improve histologic assessment of patients at diagnosis and predict treatment response and symptoms at remission. Capsule summaryTwo deep learning approaches for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE): (1) Quantification of eosinophils throughout an entire biopsy, which predicted treatment at remission (2) Classifying esophageal tissue as EoE or normal, which predicted symptoms at remission.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
American Journal of Gastroenterology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
29.4%
2
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.9%
50% of probability mass above
3
Neurogastroenterology & Motility
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.1%
4
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.3%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.2%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 49%
2.0%
7
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
8
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
9
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
10
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
11
Journal of Cystic Fibrosis
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
12
Gut
36 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
13
Gastroenterology
40 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
14
The Journal of Pain
26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
15
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
ERJ Open Research
44 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
17
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology
41 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
18
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
19
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
20
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
22
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
23
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%