» Articles » PMID: 33349257

Development and Validation of an Artificial Intelligence System for Grading Colposcopic Impressions and Guiding Biopsies

Abstract

Background: Colposcopy diagnosis and directed biopsy are the key components in cervical cancer screening programs. However, their performance is limited by the requirement for experienced colposcopists. This study aimed to develop and validate a Colposcopic Artificial Intelligence Auxiliary Diagnostic System (CAIADS) for grading colposcopic impressions and guiding biopsies.

Methods: Anonymized digital records of 19,435 patients were obtained from six hospitals across China. These records included colposcopic images, clinical information, and pathological results (gold standard). The data were randomly assigned (7:1:2) to a training and a tuning set for developing CAIADS and to a validation set for evaluating performance.

Results: The agreement between CAIADS-graded colposcopic impressions and pathology findings was higher than that of colposcopies interpreted by colposcopists (82.2% versus 65.9%, kappa 0.750 versus 0.516, p < 0.001). For detecting pathological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse (HSIL+), CAIADS showed higher sensitivity than the use of colposcopies interpreted by colposcopists at either biopsy threshold (low-grade or worse 90.5%, 95% CI 88.9-91.4% versus 83.5%, 81.5-85.3%; high-grade or worse 71.9%, 69.5-74.2% versus 60.4%, 57.9-62.9%; all p < 0.001), whereas the specificities were similar (low-grade or worse 51.8%, 49.8-53.8% versus 52.0%, 50.0-54.1%; high-grade or worse 93.9%, 92.9-94.9% versus 94.9%, 93.9-95.7%; all p > 0.05). The CAIADS also demonstrated a superior ability in predicting biopsy sites, with a median mean-intersection-over-union (mIoU) of 0.758.

Conclusions: The CAIADS has potential in assisting beginners and for improving the diagnostic quality of colposcopy and biopsy in the detection of cervical precancer/cancer.

Citing Articles

Possible challenges to the widespread use of colposcopic artificial intelligence auxiliary diagnostic system in clinical practice.

Ye H Digit Health. 2025; 11:20552076251320312.

PMID: 39949848 PMC: 11822807. DOI: 10.1177/20552076251320312.


Clinical Prospects for Artificial Intelligence in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Sone K, Taguchi A, Miyamoto Y, Uchino-Mori M, Iriyama T, Hirota Y JMA J. 2025; 8(1):113-120.

PMID: 39926075 PMC: 11799576. DOI: 10.31662/jmaj.2024-0197.


Performance of artificial intelligence for diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu L, Liu J, Su Q, Chu Y, Xia H, Xu R EClinicalMedicine. 2025; 80():102992.

PMID: 39834510 PMC: 11743870. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102992.


The prevalence of frailty among older adults with maintenance hemodialysis: a systematic.

Li J, Xiao W, Wang L, Zhang M, Ge Y BMC Nephrol. 2025; 26(1):10.

PMID: 39794749 PMC: 11724589. DOI: 10.1186/s12882-024-03921-3.


Artificial Intelligence and Colposcopy: Automatic Identification of Vaginal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Precursors.

Mascarenhas M, Alencoao I, Carinhas M, Martins M, Ribeiro T, Mendes F Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(20).

PMID: 39456634 PMC: 11505987. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16203540.


References
1.
Luo H, Xu G, Li C, He L, Luo L, Wang Z . Real-time artificial intelligence for detection of upper gastrointestinal cancer by endoscopy: a multicentre, case-control, diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20(12):1645-1654. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30637-0. View

2.
Miyagi Y, Takehara K, Nagayasu Y, Miyake T . Application of deep learning to the classification of uterine cervical squamous epithelial lesion from colposcopy images combined with HPV types. Oncol Lett. 2020; 19(2):1602-1610. PMC: 6956417. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.11214. View

3.
Fan A, Wang C, Zhang L, Yan Y, Han C, Xue F . Diagnostic value of the 2011 International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy Terminology in predicting cervical lesions. Oncotarget. 2018; 9(10):9166-9176. PMC: 5823637. DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24074. View

4.
Jeronimo J, Schiffman M . Colposcopy at a crossroads. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 195(2):349-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.091. View

5.
Silver M, Andrews J, Cooper C, Gage J, Gold M, Khan M . Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132(3):725-735. PMC: 6105396. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002812. View