Bridging Histopathology and Radiomics Toward Prognosis of Metastasis in Early Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumor histomorphology is crucial for the prognostication of breast cancer outcomes because it contains histological, cellular, and molecular tumor heterogeneity related to metastatic potential. To enhance breast cancer prognosis, we aimed to apply radiomics analysis-traditionally used in 3D scans-to 2D histopathology slides. This study tested radiomics analysis in a cohort of 92 breast tumor specimens for outcome prognosis, addressing -omics dimensionality by comparing models with moderate and high feature counts, using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator for feature selection and machine learning for prognostic modeling. In the test folds, models with radiomics features [area under the curves (AUCs) range 0.799-0.823] significantly outperformed the benchmark model, which only included clinicopathological (CP) parameters (AUC = 0.584). The moderate-dimensionality model with 11 CP + 93 radiomics features matched the performance of the highly dimensional models with 1,208 radiomics or 11 CP + 1,208 radiomics features, showing average AUCs of 0.823, 0.799, and 0.807 and accuracies of 79.8, 79.3, and 76.6%, respectively. In conclusion, our application of deep texture radiomics analysis to 2D histopathology showed strong prognostic performance with a moderate-dimensionality model, surpassing a benchmark based on standard CP parameters, indicating that this deep texture histomics approach could potentially become a valuable prognostic tool.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".