Introduction: The nucleated-cell differential count on the bone marrow aspirate smears is required for the clinical diagnosis of hematological malignancy. Manual bone marrow differential count is time consuming and lacks consistency. In this study, a novel artificial intelligence (AI)-based system was developed to perform cell automatic classification of bone marrow cells and determine its potential clinical applications. Materials and Methods: Bone marrow aspirate smears were collected from the Xinqiao Hospital of Army Medical University. First, an automated analysis system (Morphogo) scanned and generated whole digital images of bone marrow smears. Then, the nucleated marrow cells in the selected areas of the smears at a magnification of ×1,000 were analyzed by the software utilizing an AI-based platform. The cell classification results were further reviewed and confirmed independently by 2 experienced pathologists. The automatic cell classification performance of the system was evaluated using 3 categories: accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Correlation coefficients and linear regression equations between automatic cell classification by the AI-based system and concurrent manual differential count were calculated. Results: In 230 cases, the classification accuracy was above 85.7% for hematopoietic lineage cells. Averages of sensitivity and specificity of the system were found to be 69.4 and 97.2%, respectively. The differential cell percentage of the automated count based on 200–500 cell counts was correlated with differential cell percentage provided by the pathologists for granulocytes, erythrocytes, and lymphocytes (r ≥ 0.762, p < 0.001). Discussion/Conclusion: This pilot study confirmed that the Morphogo system is a reliable tool for automatic bone marrow cell differential count analysis and has potential for clinical applications. Current ongoing large-scale multicenter validation studies will provide more information to further confirm the clinical utility of the system.

1.
Swerdlow
SH
,
Campo
E
,
Pileri
SA
,
Harris
NL
,
Stein
H
,
Siebert
R
, et al
The 2016 revision of the World Health Organization classification of lymphoid neoplasms
.
Blood
.
2016
;
127
(
20
):
2375
90
.
2.
Bentley
S
.
Automated differential white cell counts: a critical appraisal
.
Baillieres Clin Haematol
.
1990
;
3
(
4
):
851
69
.
3.
Rümke
C
.
Imprecision of ratio-derived differential leukocyte counts
.
Blood Cells
.
1985
;
11
(
2
):
311
4
,
315
.
4.
Kratz
A
,
Bengtsson
HI
,
Casey
JE
,
Keefe
JM
,
Beatrice
GH
,
Grzybek
DY
, et al
Performance evaluation of the CellaVision DM96 system: WBC differentials by automated digital image analysis supported by an artificial neural network
.
Am J Clin Pathol
.
2005
;
124
(
5
):
770
81
.
5.
de Bitencourt
ED
,
Voegeli
CF
,
Onzi
GS
,
Boscato
SC
,
Ghem
C
,
Munhoz
T
.
Validation of the Sysmex sp-1000i automated slide preparer-stainer in a clinical laboratory
.
Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter
.
2013
;
35
(
6
):
404
8
.
6.
Kratz
A
,
Lee
S
,
Zini
G
,
Riedl
JA
,
Hur
M
,
Machin
S
, et al
Digital morphology analyzers in hematology: ICSH review and recommendations
.
Int J Lab Hematol
.
2019
;
41
(
4
):
437
47
.
7.
Esteva
A
,
Robicquet
A
,
Ramsundar
B
,
Kuleshov
V
,
DePristo
M
,
Chou
K
, et al
A guide to deep learning in healthcare
.
Nat Med
.
2019
;
25
(
1
):
24
9
.
8.
Choi
JW
,
Ku
Y
,
Yoo
BW
,
Kim
JA
,
Lee
DS
,
Chai
YJ
, et al
White blood cell differential count of maturation stages in bone marrow smear using dual-stage convolutional neural networks
.
PloS One
.
2017
;
12
(
12
):
e0189259
.
9.
Billard
M
,
Lainey
E
,
Armoogum
P
,
Alberti
C
,
Fenneteau
O
,
Da Costa
L
.
Evaluation of the CellaVision DM automated microscope in pediatrics
.
Int J Lab Hematol
.
2010
;
32
(
5
):
530
8
.
10.
Thurman
AC
,
Davis
JL
,
Jan
M
,
McCulloch
CE
,
Buelow
BD
.
Development and validation of an app-based cell counter for use in the clinical laboratory setting
.
J Pathol Inform
.
2015
;
6
:
2
.
11.
West Medica
Austria
.
Vision Hema: automatic identification and pre-classification of blood cells and bone marrow cells
.
2019
. .
12.
Tabe
Y
,
Yamamoto
T
,
Maenou
I
,
Nakai
R
,
Idei
M
,
Horii
T
, et al
Performance evaluation of the digital cell imaging analyzer DI-60 integrated into the fully automated Sysmex XN hematology analyzer system
.
Clin Chem Lab Med
.
2015
;
53
(
2
):
281
9
.
13.
Haghighi
S
,
Jasemi
M
,
Hessabi
S
,
Zolanvari
A
.
PyCM: multiclass confusion matrix library in Python
.
Joss
.
2018
;
3
(
25
):
729
.
14.
Ceelie
H
,
Dinkelaar
RB
,
van Gelder
W
.
Examination of peripheral blood films using automated microscopy; evaluation of Diffmaster Octavia and Cellavision DM96
.
J Clin Pathol
.
2007
;
60
(
1
):
72
9
.
15.
Kim
HN
,
Hur
M
,
Kim
H
,
Kim
SW
,
Moon
HW
,
Yun
YM
.
Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60
.
Clin Chem Lab Med
.
2017
;
56
(
1
):
94
102
.
16.
Huisjes
R
,
van Solinge
WW
,
Levin
MD
,
van Wijk
R
,
Riedl
JA
.
Digital microscopy as a screening tool for the diagnosis of hereditary hemolytic anemia
.
Int J Lab Hematol
.
2018
;
40
(
2
):
159
68
.
17.
Stouten
K
,
Riedl
JA
,
Levin
MD
,
van Gelder
W
.
Examination of peripheral blood smears: performance evaluation of a digital microscope system using a large-scale leukocyte database
.
Int J Lab Hematol
.
2015
;
37
(
5
):
e137
40
.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.