MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408921799 · doi:10.1097/pai.0000000000001258

Toward Accurate Deep Learning-Based Prediction of Ki67, ER, PR, and HER2 Status From H&E-Stained Breast Cancer Images

2025· article· en· W4408921799 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Akbarnejad, Nilanjan Ray, Penny J. Barnes, Gilbert Bigras

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineCancerOncologyInternal medicineGynecologyArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite improvements in machine learning algorithms applied to digital pathology, only moderate accuracy, to predict molecular information from histology alone, has been achieved so far. One of the obstacles is the lack of large data sets to properly train machine learning models. We therefore built a data set of 185,538 breast cancer (BC) including hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and associated immunohistochemistry (IHC) images of the proliferative marker Ki67, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Optimal registration of H&E and IHC pairs was achieved. Ki67, ER, and PR IHC labels, to be predicted, were extracted from IHC assays using image analysis. These labels were ordinaly classified with incremental thresholds (cumulative logit models with balanced and partial proportional odds). HER2 label was determined as follows: positive if tumor IHC 3+ pattern is identified and otherwise negative. Cases with IHC equivocal score (2+) were excluded. A vision transformer (ViT)-based pipeline, trained with this data set, achieved prediction performance of 90% in terms of area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. ViT outperformed the weakly supervised clustering-constrained attention multiple instance learning (CLAM) which was developed to automatically identify subregions of high diagnostic value in whole slide. As a first step to "explain" artificial intelligence (AI), we evaluated the ability of both classifiers to localize these high diagnostic value subregions by inspecting their respective "attention" heat-maps. Despite high ViT AUC-ROC results, heat-maps do not obviously match areas of high diagnostic value subregions; it might however provide direction for future work to improve AI attention within whole slide images. Our proposed data set is publicly available.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.587
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207