Denne side blev automatisk oversat, og nøjagtigheden af ​​oversættelsen er ikke garanteret. Der henvises til engelsk version for en kildetekst.

AI-Augmented Diagnostic Assessment With ENLIGHT Versus Independent Pathologist Review (ENLIGHT)

28. juli 2026 opdateret af: Kun-Hsing Yu, Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)

This study will evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance clinicians' accuracy, efficiency, and confidence in distinguishing lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) from lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) and kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma (KIRP) from kidney renal clear cell carcinoma (KIRC) using digitized pathology slides. These subtype classifications are routinely performed by pathologists but can be challenging and time-consuming, particularly in difficult cases.

During the study, participating clinicians will review lung and kidney pathology slides under three different conditions:

  • Unaided Review: Diagnosis without AI assistance.
  • AI as Double-Check: The clinician first makes an independent diagnosis, after which the AI-generated diagnosis (prediction only or prediction with explanation) is revealed for review.
  • AI as First-Look: The AI-generated diagnosis (prediction only or prediction with explanation) is presented before the clinician begins the review.

Clinicians will be randomly assigned to different review sequences to minimize potential order effects. This study design will enable us to assess the impact of AI assistance on diagnostic accuracy, interpretation time, and clinician confidence.

Studieoversigt

Status

Tilmelding efter invitation

Betingelser

Intervention / Behandling

Detaljeret beskrivelse

This study aims to evaluate the effect of artificial intelligence (AI) assistance on clinicians' diagnostic performance in distinguishing lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) from lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) and kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma (KIRP) from kidney renal clear cell carcinoma (KIRC) using digitized hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained whole-slide images (WSIs). ENLIGHT (Explainable Neoplasm Learning In Grounded Histology Terms) will serve as the AI system under evaluation. This is a single-session, within-reader, between-case study in which each reader evaluates distinct sets of cases under all study conditions.

The study includes three diagnostic blocks: Block X, in which WSIs are reviewed without AI assistance; Block Y1, in which clinicians make an initial diagnosis before viewing the AI output as a double-check; and Block Y2, in which the AI output is displayed before clinicians begin their review as a first-look aid. Within each AI-assisted block, the prediction-only and prediction-with-explanation sub-blocks are presented in randomized order.

Each participating pathologist will review up to 400 de-identified WSIs (up to 200 lung cancer and up to 200 kidney cancer cases). Readers will be randomly assigned to one of four study arms that differ only in the order in which Blocks X, Y1, and Y2 are completed. For each reader, distinct WSIs will be randomly assigned to the diagnostic conditions so that no WSI is reviewed more than once by the same reader.

  • Arm 1 (X -> Y1 -> Y2): Clinicians first complete Block X (Unaided Review), followed by Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) and then Block Y2 (AI as First-Look).
  • Arm 2 (X -> Y2 -> Y1): Clinicians first complete Block X (Unaided Review), followed by Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) and then Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check).
  • Arm 3 (Y1 -> Y2 -> X): Clinicians first complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check), followed by Block Y2 (AI as First-Look), and then Block X (Unaided Review).
  • Arm 4 (Y2 -> Y1 -> X): Clinicians first complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look), followed by Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check), and then Block X (Unaided Review).

For each case, diagnostic accuracy, time to diagnosis, and diagnostic confidence will be recorded. No reader will review the same WSI under more than one condition, thereby eliminating within-reader recall bias. In parallel, the ENLIGHT model will independently generate diagnostic predictions for all WSIs to enable direct benchmarking of AI performance against pathologists and to evaluate the impact of different AI-assisted workflows on diagnostic performance.

Undersøgelsestype

Interventionel

Tilmelding (Anslået)

25

Fase

  • Ikke anvendelig

Kontakter og lokationer

Dette afsnit indeholder kontaktoplysninger for dem, der udfører undersøgelsen, og oplysninger om, hvor denne undersøgelse udføres.

Studiesteder

  • Forenede Stater
    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, Forenede Stater, 02115
        • Harvard Medical School,

Deltagelseskriterier

Forskere leder efter personer, der passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kaldet berettigelseskriterier. Nogle eksempler på disse kriterier er en persons generelle helbredstilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Berettigelseskriterier

Aldre berettiget til at studere

  • Barn
  • Voksen
  • Ældre voksen

Tager imod sunde frivillige

Ingen

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria for Pathology Slides (i.e., Cases):

  • Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained pathology slides
  • Final diagnosis confirmed through molecular testing in conjunction with expert pathology evaluation

Exclusion Criteria for Pathology Slides (i.e., Cases):

  • Poor-quality or unreadable slides
  • Cases used in AI training

Inclusion Criteria for Readers (i.e., Participants):

  • Board-certified or board-eligible pathologists
  • Willingness to complete both unaided and AI-assisted review sessions

Studieplan

Dette afsnit indeholder detaljer om studieplanen, herunder hvordan undersøgelsen er designet, og hvad undersøgelsen måler.

Hvordan er undersøgelsen tilrettelagt?

Design detaljer

  • Primært formål: Diagnostisk
  • Tildeling: Randomiseret
  • Interventionel model: Crossover opgave
  • Maskning: Firedobbelt

Våben og indgreb

Deltagergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandling
Aktiv komparator: Unaided Review First, Then AI as Double-Check, Then AI as First-Look.
Readers first complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. For each reader, each of the five subsets (SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b) comprises up to 80 slides: up to 40 slides from LUAD-LUSC and up to 40 slides from KIRP-KIRC.
Adfærdsmæssigt: Unaided Review First, Then AI as Double-Check, Then AI as First-Look.
Readers first complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. For each reader, SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b are disjoint.
Aktiv komparator: Unaided Review First, Then AI as First-Look, Then AI as Double-Check.
Readers first complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. For each reader, each of the five subsets (SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b) comprises up to 80 slides: up to 40 slides from LUAD-LUSC and up to 40 slides from KIRP-KIRC.
Adfærdsmæssigt: Unaided Review First, Then AI as First-Look, Then AI as Double-Check.
Readers first complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. For each reader, SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b are disjoint.
Aktiv komparator: AI as Double-Check Review First, Then AI as First-Look, Then Unaided Review.
Readers first complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. Then readers complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. For each reader, each of the five subsets (SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b) comprises up to 80 slides: up to 40 slides from LUAD-LUSC and up to 40 slides from KIRP-KIRC.
Adfærdsmæssigt: AI as Double-Check First, Then AI as First-Look, Then Unaided Review.
Readers first complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. They then complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. Then readers complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. For each reader, SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b are disjoint.
Aktiv komparator: AI as First-Look Review First, Then AI as Double-Check, Then Unaided Review.
Readers first complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. Then readers complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. For each reader, each of the five subsets (SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b) comprises up to 80 slides: up to 40 slides from LUAD-LUSC and up to 40 slides from KIRP-KIRC.
Adfærdsmæssigt: AI as First-Look First, Then AI as Double-Check, Then Unaided Review.
Readers first complete Block Y2 (AI as First-Look) on two separate subsets: SY2a (AI prediction-only as First-Look) and SY2b (AI prediction-with-explanation as First-Look). Within Block Y2, the order of SY2a and SY2b is randomized. They then complete Block Y1 (AI as Double-Check) on two separate subsets: SY1a (AI prediction-only as Double-Check) and SY1b (AI prediction-with-explanation as Double-Check). Within Block Y1, the order of SY1a and SY1b is randomized. Then readers complete Block X (Unaided) on their assigned subset SX. For each reader, SX, SY1a, SY1b, SY2a, and SY2b are disjoint.

Hvad måler undersøgelsen?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Diagnostic performance of cancers
Tidsramme: Periprocedural (at the time of slide review)
Performance of clinicians (unaided and AI-assisted) for distinguishing LUAD- LUSC and distinguishing KIRP-KIRC, measured in accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and F1.
Periprocedural (at the time of slide review)

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Tid til diagnose
Tidsramme: Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Gennemsnitlig tid (sekunder pr. Sag), der kræves for at afslutte en diagnose.
Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Inter-observer-variation
Tidsramme: Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Aftale mellem klinikere på tværs af forhold, målt ved hjælp af pålidelighed mellem rater (f.eks. Kappa-statistik).
Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Nettofordel efter AI -eksponering
Tidsramme: Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Den samlede ændring i diagnostisk nøjagtighed, der kan henføres til AI -hjælp.
Periprocedural (på tidspunktet for Slide Review)
Clinician confidence level
Tidsramme: Periprocedural (at the time of slide review)
Self-reported diagnostic confidence recorded for each case. Scale: 5 - Absolutely Certain; 4 - Mostly Certain; 3 - Unsure; 2 - Very Doubtful; 1 - Random Guess; With 5 being the highest confidence score and 1 being the lowest.
Periprocedural (at the time of slide review)

Samarbejdspartnere og efterforskere

Det er her, du vil finde personer og organisationer, der er involveret i denne undersøgelse.

Sponsor

Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)

Datoer for undersøgelser

Disse datoer sporer fremskridtene for indsendelser af undersøgelsesrekord og resumeresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieregistreringer og rapporterede resultater gennemgås af National Library of Medicine (NLM) for at sikre, at de opfylder specifikke kvalitetskontrolstandarder, før de offentliggøres på den offentlige hjemmeside.

Studer store datoer

Studiestart (Anslået)

1. juli 2026

Primær færdiggørelse (Anslået)

1. august 2026

Studieafslutning (Anslået)

1. august 2026

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først indsendt

28. juli 2026

Først indsendt, der opfyldte QC-kriterier

28. juli 2026

Først opslået (Faktiske)

3. august 2026

Opdateringer af undersøgelsesjournaler

Sidste opdatering sendt (Faktiske)

3. august 2026

Sidste opdatering indsendt, der opfyldte kvalitetskontrolkriterier

28. juli 2026

Sidst verificeret

1. juli 2026

Mere information

Begreber relateret til denne undersøgelse

Nøgleord

Yderligere relevante MeSH-vilkår

Andre undersøgelses-id-numre

  • ENLIGHT Study

Plan for individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)

Planlægger du at dele individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)?

INGEN

Lægemiddel- og udstyrsoplysninger, undersøgelsesdokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret lægemiddelprodukt

Ingen

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret enhedsprodukt

Ingen

Disse oplysninger blev hentet direkte fra webstedet clinicaltrials.gov uden ændringer. Hvis du har nogen anmodninger om at ændre, fjerne eller opdatere dine undersøgelsesoplysninger, bedes du kontakte register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ændring er implementeret på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også blive opdateret automatisk på vores hjemmeside .

Abonner