Deep learning integrates histopathology and proteogenomics at a pan-cancer level
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a pioneering approach that integrates pathology imaging with transcriptomics and proteomics to identify predictive histology features associated with critical clinical outcomes in cancer. We utilize 2,755 H&E-stained histopathological slides from 657 patients across 6 cancer types from CPTAC. Our models effectively recapitulate distinctions readily made by human pathologists: tumor vs. normal (AUROC = 0.995) and tissue-of-origin (AUROC = 0.979). We further investigate predictive power on tasks not normally performed from H&E alone, including TP53 prediction and pathologic stage. Importantly, we describe predictive morphologies not previously utilized in a clinical setting. The incorporation of transcriptomics and proteomics identifies pathway-level signatures and cellular processes driving predictive histology features. Model generalizability and interpretability is confirmed using TCGA. We propose a classification system for these tasks, and suggest potential clinical applications for this integrated human and machine learning approach. A publicly available web-based platform implements these models.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it