IP Library Granted Patent US 11,928,820
Granted Patent B2
US 11,928,820 · App. 18/174,284 · Granted Mar 12, 2024

Systems and methods for analyzing electronic images for quality control

Inventors: Jillian Sue (New York, NY); Razik Yousfi (Brooklyn, NY); Peter Schueffler (Munich, DE); Thomas Fuchs (New York, NY); Leo Grady (Darien, CT)
Assignee: Paige.AI, Inc.
G06T7/0014G16H30/40G16H50/20G16H70/60G06T2207/10056G06T2207/20081G06T2207/30024G06T2207/30168
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 11,928,820
App. No.
18/174,284
Granted
Mar 12, 2024
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods are disclosed for receiving a digital image corresponding to a target specimen associated with a pathology category, determining a quality control (QC) machine learning model to predict a quality designation based on one or more artifacts, providing the digital image as an input to the QC machine learning model, receiving the quality designation for the digital image as an output from the machine learning model, and outputting the quality designation of the digital image. A quality assurance (QA) machine learning model may predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers. The digital image may be provided to the QA model which may output a disease designation. An external designation may be compared to the disease designation and a comparison result may be output.

Claims (59)

1. A computer-implemented method for processing electronic images, the method comprising:

receiving a digital image corresponding to a target specimen associated with a pathology category, wherein the digital image is an image of human or animal tissue and/or an image algorithmically generated to replicate human or animal tissue;

determining a quality control (QC) machine learning model, the QC machine learning model being configured to predict a quality designation based on a presence or lack of one or more artifacts and/or;

providing the digital image as an input to the QC machine learning model;

receiving the quality designation associated with the digital image as an output from the QC machine learning model;

determining, based on the output from the QC machine learning model, whether the quality designation is either an approved designation or a rejected designation, wherein the quality designation is indicative or artifacts such as errors or imperfections in the digital image, wherein the quality designation includes an approval scale and/or a rejection scale that provides a finer indication of the image quality;

determining a quality assurance (QA) machine learning model configured to predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers, the QA machine learning model being different than the QC machine learning model;

providing the digital image to the QA machine learning model;

receiving a disease designation for the digital image as an output from the QA machine learning model;

receiving an external designation for one of the digital image or the target specimen and comprising a disease property selected from at least one of a cancer detection, a cancer grade, a cancer origin, a diagnosis, a presence or absence of a microorganism, a specimen type, a cancer type, a cancer status, a tumor size, a lesions risk level, or a grade;

evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation;

outputting a comparison result based on evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation; and

rejecting the external designation based on the evaluation, based on the external designation deviating from the disease designation beyond a predetermined threshold.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein outputting the quality designation of the digital image further comprises generating a report comprising at least one of a type of artifact found, a number of artifacts found, clinical impact of an artifact found, a time to rectify an artifact, potential pattern, or correlation in a plurality of artifacts.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the pathology category is one of histology, cytology, frozen section, or immunohistochemistry.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the quality designation includes a quality score determination.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising automatically generating a notification based on quality characteristic, the notification comprising an artifact presence, absence, or degree designation.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein outputting the quality designation of the digital image further comprises a visual indicator corresponding to an artifact of the digital image.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the QA machine learning model is generated by processing a plurality of training images, associated with the pathology category, to predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more artifacts comprise a missing tissue, a glass crack, a bubble, a blur amount, a missing tissue, a folded tissue, a line, a scratch, dust, pen, or a stain amount.

9. A system for processing electronic images, the system comprising:

at least one memory storing instructions; and

at least one processor executing the instructions to perform operations comprising:

receiving a digital image corresponding to a target specimen associated with a pathology category, wherein the digital image is an image of human or animal tissue and/or an image algorithmically generated to replicate human or animal tissue;

determining a quality control (QC) machine learning model, the QC machine learning model being configured to predict a quality designation based on a presence or lack of one or more artifacts and/or;

providing the digital image as an input to the QC machine learning model;

receiving the quality designation associated with the digital image as an output from the QC machine learning model;

determining, based on the output from the QC machine learning model, whether the quality designation is either an approved designation or a rejected designation, wherein the quality designation is indicative or artifacts such as errors or imperfections in the digital image, wherein the quality designation includes an approval scale and/or a rejection scale that provides a finer indication of the image quality;

determining a quality assurance (QA) machine learning model configured to predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers, the QA machine learning model being different than the QC machine learning model;

providing the digital image to the QA machine learning model;

receiving a disease designation for the digital image as an output from the QA machine learning model;

receiving an external designation for one of the digital image or the target specimen and comprising a disease property selected from at least one of a cancer detection, a cancer grade, a cancer origin, a diagnosis, a presence or absence of a microorganism, a specimen type, a cancer type, a cancer status, a tumor size, a lesions risk level, or a grade;

evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation;

outputting a comparison result based on evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation; and

rejecting the external designation based on the evaluation, based on the external designation deviating from the disease designation beyond a predetermined threshold.

10. The system of claim 9 , wherein outputting the quality designation of the digital image further comprises generating a report comprising at least one of a type of artifact found, a number of artifacts found, clinical impact of an artifact found, a time to rectify an artifact, potential pattern, or correlation in a plurality of artifacts.

11. The system of claim 9 , wherein the pathology category is one of histology, cytology, frozen section, or immunohistochemistry.

12. The system of claim 9 , wherein the quality designation includes a quality score determination.

13. The system of claim 9 , further comprising automatically generating a notification based on quality characteristic, the notification comprising an artifact presence, absence, or degree designation.

14. The system of claim 9 , wherein outputting the quality designation of the digital image further comprises a visual indicator corresponding to an artifact of the digital image.

15. The system of claim 9 , wherein the QA machine learning model is generated by processing a plurality of training images, associated with the pathology category, to predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers.

16. The system of claim 9 , wherein the one or more artifacts comprise a missing tissue, a glass crack, a bubble, a blur amount, a missing tissue, a folded tissue, a line, a scratch, dust, pen, or a stain amount.

17. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform operations processing electronic medical images, the operations comprising:

receiving a digital image corresponding to a target specimen associated with a pathology category, wherein the digital image is an image of human or animal tissue and/or an image algorithmically generated to replicate human or animal tissue;

determining a quality control (QC) machine learning model, the QC machine learning model being configured to predict a quality designation based on a presence or lack of one or more artifacts and/or;

providing the digital image as an input to the QC machine learning model;

receiving the quality designation associated with the digital image as an output from the QC machine learning model;

determining, based on the output from the QC machine learning model, whether the quality designation is either an approved designation or a rejected designation, wherein the quality designation is indicative or artifacts such as errors or imperfections in the digital image, wherein the quality designation includes an approval scale and/or a rejection scale that provides a finer indication of the image quality;

determining a quality assurance (QA) machine learning model configured to predict a disease designation based on one or more biomarkers, the QA machine learning model being different than the QC machine learning model;

providing the digital image to the QA machine learning model;

receiving a disease designation for the digital image as an output from the QA machine learning model;

receiving an external designation for one of the digital image or the target specimen and comprising a disease property selected from at least one of a cancer detection, a cancer grade, a cancer origin, a diagnosis, a presence or absence of a microorganism, a specimen type, a cancer type, a cancer status, a tumor size, a lesions risk level, or a grade;

evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation;

outputting a comparison result based on evaluating the external designation by comparing the disease designation to the external designation; and

rejecting the external designation based on the evaluation, based on the external designation deviating from the disease designation beyond a predetermined threshold.

18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17 , wherein outputting the quality designation of the digital image further comprises generating a report comprising at least one of a type of artifact found, a number of artifacts found, clinical impact of an artifact found, a time to rectify an artifact, potential pattern, or correlation in a plurality of artifacts.

19. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more artifacts is a blur, missing tissue, line, folded tissue, bubbles, cracks in glass, scratches, dust, pen marking, and/or stains of the digital image.

20. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further concluding:

determining, using the QC machine learning model, a report based on the quality designation, the report including types of artifacts found, number of each type of artifact, clinical impact of artifacts, time to rectify artifact, and/or potential patterns or correlations in artifacts.

Assignments (3)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded May 14, 2026
From: ARES CAPITAL CORPORATION, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: PAIGE.AI, INC.
Reel/Frame 075589/0752 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Oct 21, 2025
From: PAIGE.AI, INC.
To: ARES CAPITAL CORPORATION, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 073216/0876 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 10, 2023
From: SUE, JILLIAN; YOUSFI, RAZIK; SCHUEFFLER, PETER; FUCHS, THOMAS; GRADY, LEO
To: PAIGE.AI, INC.
Reel/Frame 062939/0618 →
Continuity (4)
Continuation 17457268 · Dec 2, 2021
Continuation 17126596 · Dec 18, 2020
Provisional Application 62957517 · Jan 6, 2020
Related Publication 20230222662A1 · Jul 13, 2023