Automated mitotic spindle hotspot counts are highly associated with clinical outcomes in systemically untreated early-stage triple-negative breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Operable triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has a higher risk of recurrence and death compared to other subtypes. Tumor size and nodal status are the primary clinical factors used to guide systemic treatment, while biomarkers of proliferation have not demonstrated value. Recent studies suggest that subsets of TNBC have a favorable prognosis, even without systemic therapy. We evaluated the association of fully automated mitotic spindle hotspot (AMSH) counts with recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in two separate cohorts of patients with early-stage TNBC who did not receive systemic therapy. AMSH counts were obtained from areas with the highest mitotic density in digitized whole slide images processed with a convolutional neural network trained to detect mitoses. In 140 patients from the Mayo Clinic TNBC cohort, AMSH counts were significantly associated with RFS and OS in a multivariable model controlling for nodal status, tumor size, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) (p < 0.0001). For every 10-point increase in AMSH counts, there was a 16% increase in the risk of an RFS event (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.25), and a 7% increase in the risk of death (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.14). We corroborated these findings in a separate cohort of systemically untreated TNBC patients from Radboud UMC in the Netherlands. Our findings suggest that AMSH counts offer valuable prognostic information in patients with early-stage TNBC who did not receive systemic therapy, independent of tumor size, nodal status, and TILs. If further validated, AMSH counts could help inform future systemic therapy de-escalation 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".