MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362594696 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2023-5695

Abstract 5695: Deep learning risk prediction model of distant recurrence from H&E endometrial cancer slides

2023· article· en· W4362594696 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Fremond, Sonali Andani, Jurriaan Barkey Wolf, Gitte Ørtoft, Estrid Høgdall, Jouke Dijkstra, Jan J. Jobsen, Ina M. Jürgenliemk‐Schulz, Ludy Lutgens, Melanie Powell, Naveena Singh, Linda Mileshkin, Helen Mackay, Alexandra Léary, Dionyssios Katsaros, Hans W. Nijman, Stephanie M. de Boer, Remi A. Nout, Vincent T.H.B.M. Smit, Carien L. Creutzberg, Nanda Horeweg, Viktor H. Koelzer, Tjalling Bosse

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConcordanceArtificial intelligenceEndometrial cancerRisk stratificationInternal medicineCutoffOncologyMachine learningCancerComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate risk prediction of distant recurrence (DR) is crucial for personalized adjuvant systemic therapy of endometrial cancer (EC) stage I-III patients, as DR is associated with a 5-year overall survival of 10-20%. Risk stratification and treatment recommendation are currently based on histopathological and molecular markers, which is challenging due to high inter-observer variability and testing costs respectively. Deep Learning (DL) models can predict prognosis by identifying relevant visual features from H&E whole slide images (WSIs) at different resolutions without prior assumptions. Here, we developed and tested the first interpretable state-of-the-art DL model for WSI-based risk prediction of DR of stage I-III EC (DeREC) from the randomized PORTEC-1/-2/-3 trials and three clinical cohorts with long-term follow-up data. We used one representative H&E WSI each from 1761 EC patients, excluding those who received adjuvant chemotherapy as it lowers the risk of DR. We randomly sampled 20% as a held-out internal test set (N=353 with 62 events; 8.45 year median follow-up) and performed a 5-fold cross-validation on the training set (N=1408). WSIs were partitioned into 360 micron patches at 40x magnification. DeREC combined self-supervised representation learning of patches using a multi-resolution vision transformer and a WSI-level graph attention-based time-to-event prediction model. The model performance of correctly ranking patients by predicted risk scores and true time to DR was measured with the concordance-index and compared with a Cox’ Proportional Hazards (CPH) model fitted on histopathological variables (histotype, grade, lymphovascular space invasion, stage). Discriminative quality of the predicted risk groups was investigated with Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test. Most predictive patches by predicted risk groups were reviewed by an expert gynecopathologist for identification of prognostic morphological features. DeREC achieved a concordance-index of 0.764 [95%CI 0.754-0.773] on 5-fold cross validation and 0.757 on the test set, as compared to 0.704 [95%CI 0.662-0.746] with CPH. Predicted risk groups around quartiles 1 and 3 accurately stratified patients between low (N=89), intermediate (N=175), high (N=89) risk of DR (p<0.0001). Among the predicted low-risk group only 3 (3.37%) patients relapsed whereas intermediate and high-risk groups counted 27 (15.43%) and 32 (35.96%) events respectively. DeREC is the first DL model accurately distinguishing EC patients at high risk of DR from those at low risk using one H&E WSI, which would aid decisions on adjuvant treatment. DeREC outperformed standard statistical prediction methods using histopathological variables, indicating that it identified prognostic visual features which can be further investigated. Future development includes the integration of clinicopathological and molecular information. Citation Format: Sarah Fremond, Sonali Andani, Jurriaan Barkey Wolf, Gitte Ørtoft, Estrid Høgdall, Jouke Dijkstra, Jan J. Jobsen, Ina M. Jürgenliemk-Schulz, Ludy CHW Lutgens, Melanie E. Powell, Naveena Singh, Linda R. Mileshkin, Helen J. Mackay, Alexandra Leary, Dionyssios Katsaros, Hans W. Nijman, Stephanie M. de Boer, Remi A. Nout, Vincent T.H.B.M Smit, Carien L. Creutzberg, Nanda Horeweg, Viktor H. Koelzer, Tjalling Bosse. Deep learning risk prediction model of distant recurrence from H&E endometrial cancer slides. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 5695.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.164
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicAI in cancer detection→French-language works237,207→