Back

Automated segmentation and quantification of histological liver features for MASH/MASLD scoring

Spirgath, K.; Huang, B.; Safraou, Y.; Kraftberger, M.; Dahami, M.; Kiehl, R.; Stockburger, C. H. F.; Bayerl, C.; Ludwig, J.; Jaitner, N.; Kühl, A.; Asbach, P.; Geisel, D.; Hillebrandt, K. H.; Wells, R. G.; Sack, I.; Tzschätzsch, H.

2026-02-15 pathology
10.64898/2026.02.13.26346163 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background & AimsThe increasing global prevalence of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) including metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) creates an urgent need for objective methods of histopathological assessment. Conventional histological approaches are time-consuming and rely on interpreters experience. Therefore, the results obtained may suffer from high variability and only offer coarse categorisation. In this study, we propose a fully automated, deep-learning-based pipeline for the segmentation and characterisation of histological liver features for MASH/MASLD assessment. MethodsSegmentation was applied to H&E sections from 45 mice and 44 humans with MASH/MASLD. The method, which we named qHisto (quantitative histology), utilises the nnU-Net framework and quantifies key histological components of the MASH score, including macro- and microvesicular steatosis, fibrosis, inflammation, hepatocellular ballooning and glycogenated nuclei. Additionally, we characterized the tissue using novel features that are inaccessible through manual histology, such as the distribution of fat droplet sizes, aspect ratio of nuclei and heatmaps. ResultsqHisto parameters showed strong positive correlations with conventional histology scores (fat area R=0.91, inflammation density R=0.7, ballooning density R=0.49) and also with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (fat area vs. hepatic fat fraction R=0.87). Our novel scores showed that deformation of nuclei is driven by large fat droplets rather than the overall amount of fat. ConclusionsA key advantage of our method is spatially resolved, precise histological quantification. These features provide a finely resolved assessment of disease severity than conventional categorical scoring. By automating time-consuming and repetitive readouts, qHisto improves standardisation and reproducibility of MASH/MASLD feature quantification and provides scalable, slide-wide readouts that can support histopathologists and enhance clinical assessment and therapeutic development. Impact and ImplicationsThe proposed method provides an objective, automatic tool for comprehensive, histological liver analysis of MASH/MASLD, which can be extended to other diseases and organs. By offering classic and novel quantitative parameters and scores, our method could support histologists in their daily routines and provide researchers with further insight into steatotic liver diseases.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.6%
2
NMR in Biomedicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.6%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.3%
4
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.9%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 22%
4.9%
6
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
7
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.1%
8
Modern Pathology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
50% of probability mass above
9
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
10
Hepatology Communications
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
11
Hepatology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
12
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
13
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.7%
14
Medical Image Analysis
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
15
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.2%
17
Experimental Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
18
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
19
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
20
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
21
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.8%
22
The Journal of Pathology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
23
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
Metabolomics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
26
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
27
American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
28
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
29
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
30
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%