Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41825098›Full record

ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2026

AI-assisted fibrosis scoring in MASH: Exploring pathologist decision-making with an SHG-based AI digital pathology tool.

Desiree Abdurrachim, Aileen Wee, Gwyneth Soon, Michael Idowu, Timothy J Kendall, Serene Lek, Gideon Ho, Samuel S Engel, Saswata Talukdar, Chih-Liang Chin and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Desiree AbdurrachimQuantitative Biosciences, MSD, Singapore. Electronic address: desiree.abdurrachim@msd.com.
Aileen WeeDepartment of Pathology, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Gwyneth SoonDepartment of Pathology, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Michael IdowuDepartment of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.
Timothy J KendallCentre for Inflammation Research, Institute for Regeneration and Repair, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Serene LekHistoIndex Pte. Ltd., Singapore.
Gideon HoHistoIndex Pte. Ltd., Singapore.
Samuel S EngelGlobal Clinical Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Saswata TalukdarCardiometabolic Diseases, Merck & Co., Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Chih-Liang ChinCardiometabolic Diseases, Merck & Co., Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Asad Abu Bakar AliQuantitative Biosciences, MSD, Singapore.
Arun J SanyalStravitz-Sanyal Institute for Liver Disease and Metabolic Health, Virginia Commonwealth University School Of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.
David E KleinerLaboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsIntra- and inter-reader variability complicates liver biopsy scoring for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH). AI-powered digital pathology (AI-DP) is emerging as a tool to assist pathologists, with the promise of improving pathologist concordance. This study evaluates how second harmonic generation (SHG)-based AI-DP influences pathologist decision-making for fibrosis scoring and provides guidance for integrating SHG-based AI assistance into pathology workflows.

methodsFour pathologists reviewed 120 MASH cases with and without the assistance tool. We assessed changes in concordance, scoring, and pathologist perceptions via surveys and detailed case reviews. A qualitative analysis was performed on 22 selected cases (18% of all MASH cases reviewed), including cases with reduced or increased inter-pathologist variability and pathologist-AI discrepancies.

resultsPathologists reported the assistance tool as significantly helpful in 57% of cases, prompted conscious score changes in a further 12%, and not useful in 30%. Notably, score shifts between cases with and without assistance occurred even when the assistance tool was deemed unhelpful, indicating a subtle influence on scoring. The assistance tool reduced discrepancies in 65% (33/51) of previously discrepant cases, but increased discrepancies in 27% (15/66 with 1-score discrepancy and 3/66 with >1-score discrepancy) of cases initially without discrepancies. This reflects inherent pathologist variability and differing thresholds and confidence in challenging or borderline cases. Analysis of concordance changes with the assistance tool provided insights into pathologists' fibrosis staging considerations.

conclusionSHG-based AI-DP tools are promising adjuncts for fibrosis scoring in MASH. Our findings provide practical insights and recommendations for effective AI integration and highlight areas for future AI development. Collaborative human-AI approaches will be key to advancing precision histopathology and improving clinical trial outcomes in MASH. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: AI-powered digital pathology (AI-DP) as a pathologist's assistance tool can be utilized to improve pathologist concordance. However, pathologist judgement remains critical. In this study, we evaluated how pathologists used the assistance tool and how the platform impacted their decision-making. The findings are significant for pathologists and clinical researchers as they provide guidance for the well-informed use of SHG-based AI-DP as a tool to aid pathologists in fibrosis scoring in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. The insights gained can further inform policymakers about the integration of AI technologies in clinical trials or pathology workflows in clinical practice, promoting standardized practices.

Indexed as

AIcase studydigital pathologyfibrosis staginginter-reader variabilityMASHpathologist assistancepathologist scoringsecond harmonic generation

Identifiers

PMID41825098
PMCPMC12995896

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.