MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402708888 · doi:10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-c022

Abstract C022: Pathomics-based classifiers for inferring breast cancer genomic assays and prognosis in sub-Saharan Africa: Results from the Ghana Breast Health Study

2024· article· en· W4402708888 on OpenAlexaff
Mustapha Abubakar, Amber N. Hurson, Thomas U. Ahearn, Eboneé N. Butler, Alina M. Hamilton, Máire A. Duggan, Scott M. Lawrence, Joe‐Nat Clegg‐Lamptey, Joel Yarney, Beatrice Wiafe‐Addai, Baffour Awuah, Seth Wiafe, Kofi Nyarko, Francis Aitpillah, Daniel Ansong, Stephen M. Hewitt, Louise A. Brinton, Melissa A. Troester, Lawrence Edusei, Nicolas Titiloye, Jonine D. Figueroa, Montserrat García‐Closas

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineOncologyInternal medicineCancerGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Although several gene expression-based assays are validated for informing prognosis and treatment decision-making for breast cancer (BC) patients, their uptake has been hampered by technical complexities and cost, particularly in underrepresented and low-resource settings. Here, we explored whether machine learning-based features on standard hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained images can be used in conjunction with routinely available pathology data (pathomics) to infer clinically relevant tumor genomic assays among BC patients from a sub-Saharan African population. Methods: This study comprised 563 BC patients with diagnostic H&E-stained images, clinicopathological data, and Nanostring gene expression data from the Ghana Breast Health Study (GBHS), a population-based case-control study that recruited BC patients between 2013 and 2015. H&E images were analyzed using high-accuracy machine learning algorithms to extract data on several, prospectively selected, human interpretable imaging features. The assessed features encompassed characteristics of the tumor (e.g., average nuclear size, nuclear optical density, nuclear roundness, etc.) and stroma (e.g., degree of stromal cellularity, stromal cell phenotype, extent of stromal desmoplasia, remodeling, necrosis, etc.). Nanostring technology was used to generate data on PAM50 subtype [luminal (A and B), non-luminal (HER2-enriched and Basal), normal-like], 21-gene recurrence score (RS), and TP53 pathway function. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to luminal (vs other subtypes), non-luminal (vs other subtypes), TP53 mutant-like (vs wildtype-like), and RS (4th vs 1st quartile) data to develop predictive classifiers in a discovery set (60% of the data). The performance of the classifiers was then tested in a held-out internal validation set (40% of the data). Results: In the discovery set, the pathomics-based classifiers achieved varying but excellent discriminatory accuracy [AUROC = 0.90 (0.86-0.94), 0.94 (0.91-0.97), 0.95 (0.91-0.98), and 0.96 (0.94-0.99) for TP53, non-luminal, RS, and luminal classification, respectively]. In the held-out (validation) set, the corresponding AUROC values were 0.82 (0.75-0.88), 0.87 (0.81-0.92), 0.85 (0.77-0.92), and 0.88 (0.83-0.93) for TP53, non-luminal, RS, and luminal classification. The TP53 classifier was correlated with the luminal (R=-0.73), non-luminal (R=0.80), and RS (R=0.77) classifiers. The distribution of the pathomics-based TP53 probability score varied considerably between PAM50 subtypes (P<0.0001), and according to RS categories within both ER+ (P=0.009) and ER- (P=0.006) BC subtypes in the validation set. Conclusion: H&Es are cost-effective and routinely performed as part of the diagnostic workup for BC patients. Accordingly, the results open promising avenues for the use of interpretable, machine learning-based, H&E imaging and pathology data to infer breast tumor genomic signatures and prognosis in low-resource settings. Further work is required to validate findings in independent populations.: Citation Format: Mustapha Abubakar, Amber N. Hurson, Thomas U. Ahearn, Ebonee N. Butler, Alina M. Hamilton, Maire A. Duggan, Scott M. Lawrence, Ernest Adjei, Joe-Nat Clegg-Lamptey, Joel Yarney, Beatrice Wiafe-Addai, Baffour Awuah, Seth Wiafe, Kofi Nyarko, Francis Aitpillah, Daniel Ansong, Stephen Hewitt, Louise A. Brinton, Melissa A. Troester, Lawrence Edusei, Nicolas Titiloye, Jonine D. Figueroa, Montserrat Garcia-Closas. Pathomics-based classifiers for inferring breast cancer genomic assays and prognosis in sub-Saharan Africa: Results from the Ghana Breast Health Study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl):Abstract nr C022.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207