ABSTRACT
Background: Endometrial CD138+ plasma cells serve as a diagnostic biomarker for endometrial inflammation, and their elevated occurrence correlates positively with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Infertility-related conditions like polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and recurrent implantation failure (RIF) are closely associated with systemic and local chronic inflammatory status, wherein endometrial CD138+ plasma cell accumulation could also contribute to endometrial pathology. Current methods for quantifying CD138+ cells typically involve laborious and time-consuming microscopic assessments of only a few random areas from a slide. These methods have limitations in accurately representing the entire slide and are susceptible to significant biases arising from intra- and interobserver variations. Implementing artificial intelligence (AI) for CD138+ cell identification could enhance the accuracy, reproducibility, and reliability of analysis. Methods: Here, an AI algorithm was developed to identify CD138+ plasma cells within endometrial tissue. The AI model comprised two layers of convolutional neural networks (CNNs). CNN1 was trained to segment epithelium and stroma across 28,363â¯mm2 (2.56â¯mm2 of epithelium and 24.87â¯mm2 of stroma), while CNN2 was trained to distinguish stromal cells based on CD138 staining, encompassing 7345 cells in the object layers (6942 CD138- cells and 403 CD138+ cells). The training and performance of the AI model were validated by three experienced pathologists. We collected 193 endometrial tissues from healthy controls (nâ¯=â¯73), women with PCOS (nâ¯=â¯91), and RIF patients (nâ¯=â¯29) and compared the CD138+ cell percentages based on cycle phases, ovulation status, and endometrial receptivity utilizing the AI model. Results: The AI algorithm consistently and reliably distinguished CD138- and CD138+ cells, with total error rates of 6.32% and 3.23%, respectively. During the training validation, there was a complete agreement between the decisions made by the pathologists and the AI algorithm, while the performance validation demonstrated excellent accuracy between the AI and human evaluation methods (intraclass correlation; 0.76, 95% confidence intervals; 0.36-0.93, pâ¯=â¯0.002) and a positive correlation (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient: 0.79, pâ¯<â¯0.01). In the AI analysis, the AI model revealed higher CD138+ cell percentages in the proliferative phase (PE) endometrium compared to the secretory phase or anovulatory PCOS endometrium, irrespective of PCOS diagnosis. Interestingly, CD138+ percentages differed according to PCOS phenotype in the PE (pâ¯=â¯0.03). On the other hand, the receptivity status had no impact on the cell percentages in RIF samples. Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the potential and accuracy of the AI algorithm in detecting endometrial CD138+ plasma cells, offering distinct advantages over manual inspection, such as rapid analysis of whole slide images, reduction of intra- and interobserver variations, sparing the valuable time of trained specialists, and consistent productivity. This supports the application of AI technology to help clinical decision-making, for example, in understanding endometrial cycle phase-related dynamics, as well as different reproductive disorders.