Refinement of breast cancer classification by molecular characterization of histological special types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most invasive breast cancers are classified as invasive ductal carcinoma not otherwise specified (IDC NOS), whereas about 25% are defined as histological 'special types'. These special-type breast cancers are categorized into at least 17 discrete pathological entities; however, whether these also constitute discrete molecular entities remains to be determined. Current therapy decision-making is increasingly governed by the molecular classification of breast cancer (luminal, basal-like, HER2+). The molecular classification is derived from mainly IDC NOS and it is unknown whether this classification applies to all histological subtypes. We aimed to refine the breast cancer classification systems by analysing a series of 11 histological special types [invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), tubular, mucinous A, mucinous B, neuroendocrine, apocrine, IDC with osteoclastic giant cells, micropapillary, adenoid cystic, metaplastic, and medullary carcinoma] using immunohistochemistry and genome-wide gene expression profiling. Hierarchical clustering analysis confirmed that some histological special types constitute discrete entities, such as micropapillary carcinoma, but also revealed that others, including tubular and lobular carcinoma, are very similar at the transcriptome level. When classified by expression profiling, IDC NOS and ILC contain all molecular breast cancer types (ie luminal, basal-like, HER2+), whereas histological special-type cancers, apart from apocrine carcinoma, are homogeneous and only belong to one molecular subtype. Our analysis also revealed that some special types associated with a good prognosis, such as medullary and adenoid cystic carcinomas, display a poor prognosis basal-like transcriptome, providing strong circumstantial evidence that basal-like cancers constitute a heterogeneous group. Taken together, our results imply that the correct classification of breast cancers of special histological type will allow a more accurate prognostication of breast cancer patients and facilitate the identification of optimal therapeutic strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".