Cited by 13AI in cancer detectionCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Computer-Aided Assessment of Melanocytic Lesions by Means of a Mitosis Algorithm

Open access
Sturm, Bart, Creytens, David, Smits, Jan, Ooms, Ariadne H. A. G., Eijken, Erik, Kurpershoek, Eline, Küsters-Vandevelde, Heidi V. N., Wauters, Carla +2 more·2022·Diagnostics

Abstract

An increasing number of pathology laboratories are now fully digitised, using whole slide imaging (WSI) for routine diagnostics. WSI paves the road to use artificial intelligence (AI) that will play an increasing role in computer-aided diagnosis (CAD). In melanocytic skin lesions, the presence of a dermal mitosis may be an important clue for an intermediate or a malignant lesion and may indicate worse prognosis. In this study a mitosis algorithm primarily developed for breast carcinoma is applied to melanocytic skin lesions. This study aimed to assess whether the algorithm could be used in diagnosing melanocytic lesions, and to study the added value in diagnosing melanocytic lesions in a practical setting. WSI’s of a set of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained slides of 99 melanocytic lesions (35 nevi, 4 intermediate melanocytic lesions, and 60 malignant melanomas, including 10 nevoid melanomas), for which a consensus diagnosis was reached by three academic pathologists, were subjected to a mitosis algorithm based on AI. Two academic and six general pathologists specialized in dermatopathology examined the WSI cases two times, first without mitosis annotations and after a washout period of at least 2 months with mitosis annotations based on the algorithm. The algorithm indicated true mitosis in lesional cells, i.e., melanocytes, and non-lesional cells, i.e., mainly keratinocytes and inflammatory cells. A high number of false positive mitosis was indicated as well, comprising melanin pigment, sebaceous glands nuclei, and spindle cell nuclei such as stromal cells and neuroid differentiated melanocytes. All but one pathologist reported more often a dermal mitosis with the mitosis algorithm, which on a regular basis, was incorrectly attributed to mitoses from mainly inflammatory cells. The overall concordance of the pathologists with the consensus diagnosis for all cases excluding nevoid melanoma (n = 89) appeared to be comparable with and without the use of AI (89% vs. 90%). However, the concordance increased by using AI in nevoid melanoma cases (n = 10) (75% vs. 68%). This study showed that in general cases, pathologists perform similarly with the aid of a mitosis algorithm developed primarily for breast cancer. In nevoid melanoma cases, pathologists perform better with the algorithm. From this study, it can be learned that pathologists need to be aware of potential pitfalls using CAD on H&E slides, e.g., misinterpreting dermal mitoses in non-melanotic cells.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/diagnostics12020436

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Sturm et al.'s study, overall diagnostic concordance with expert consensus was similar (~90%) with and without algorithm annotations.

    “While overall diagnostic concordance with expert consensus was similar (~90%)”

    From Artificial Intelligence in Dermatopathology: An Update and Review of the Current Literature (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Results report similar concordance with and without AI (89% versus 90%), but that comparison excludes the 10 nevoid melanoma cases. The unqualified claim implies the figure covers all cases, whereas the paper reports improved concordance with AI for nevoid melanoma. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The AI mitosis detection tool flagged numerous false positives (e.g., pigmented or keratinocyte nuclei).

    “The AI flagged numerous false positives (e.g., pigmented or keratinocyte nuclei), underscoring the need for cautious interpretation.”

    From Artificial Intelligence in Dermatopathology: An Update and Review of the Current Literature (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Materials and Methods (§2.2) and Discussion (§4) report numerous false-positive detections, including melanin pigment and several kinds of nuclei. But the Results (§3) describe detections in keratinocytes as non-lesional mitoses, not keratinocyte nuclei falsely identified as mitoses. The paper also cautions against misinterpreting such detections. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In nevoid melanoma cases, the AI mitosis detection algorithm improved diagnostic concordance from 68% to 75%.

    “in nevoid melanoma cases, the algorithm improved concordance from 68% to 75%.”
  • Mitosis detection algorithms may be helpful in particularly challenging cases like nevoid melanoma but offer limited benefit in routine lesion interpretation.

    “These findings suggest that mitosis detection algorithms may be helpful in particularly challenging cases like nevoid melanoma but offer limited benefit in routine lesion interpretation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [2]Tomaszewski J. Overview of the role of artificial intelligence in pathology: The computer as a pathology digital assistent Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning in Pathology 1st ed. Cohen S. Elsevier Amsterdam, The Netherland 2021
  2. [7]Howlader N. Noone A.M. Krapcho M. Miller D. Brest A. Yu M. Ruhl J. Tatalovich Z. Mariotto A. Lewis D.R. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2018 National Cancer Institute Bethesda, MD, USA 2021

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sturm, B., Creytens, D., Smits, J., Ooms, A. H. A. G., Eijken, E., Kurpershoek, E., Küsters-Vandevelde, H. V. N., Wauters, C., Blokx, W. A. M., & van der Laak, J. A. W. M.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • Pathan B.V., 3045 PM Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Laboratory for Pathology Oost Nederland (LabPON), 7550 AM Hengelo, The Netherlands
  • Department of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, 6500 GS Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Venue
Diagnostics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-02-08
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
436
ISSN
2075-4418 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211247273
Cited by
13
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diagnostics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
  • European Commission (945358)
  • Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
melanocytic lesions, computer-aided diagnosis, whole slide imaging, nevoid melanoma, melanoma, melanocytic nevi, dermatopathology, algorithm transferability, H&E staining

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review