MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract B048: Large Scale, AI-Enabled, Spatial Signal Processing of Breast Cancer Pathology Identifies Consensus Tissue Structures Related to Biology and Outcomes

2025· article· en· W4412163728 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jordan E. Krull, Yi Jiang, Karthik Chakravarthy, Daniel Spakowicz, Qin Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerCancerScale (ratio)PathologyMedicineBiologyComputational biologyInternal medicineCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Breast cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, underscoring the critical need for innovative diagnostic and prognostic approaches. Spatial evaluation of tissue structure in breast cancer provides valuable insights into the tumor microenvironment, including cellular organization, stromal interactions, and molecular heterogeneity. However, large-scale, high-resolution profiling of tumor structure is not financially nor logistically feasible. In this study, we sought to interrogate spatial signal organization in a large set of breast pathology images to identify common structural features and associated biology, in an unsupervised manner, and connect the presence of these features to clinically relevant endpoints. To accomplish this objective, we utilized a large cohort (n=1988) of normal breast and breast cancer biopsy digital, whole-slide, pathology images (WSI), from TCGA (n=1058), OSU’s TCC (n=401), and GTEx (n=529). WSI processing and QC included color normalization and artifact segmentation. Quality tissue areas were tiled into non-overlapping 224mm x 224mm boxes of 1mm/px and feature embeddings were subsequently extracted from tiles using a deep learning pathology foundation model (CTransPath). Each embedding was subsequently converted to spatial Fourier coefficients (FCs), specific to each sample, using spatial graph Fourier transform, and converted to feature spatial-coordination maps generated from cosine similarity of embedding FCs. To identify conserved tissue structures, we developed a customized graph-neural-network (GNN), trained to identify a common latent feature space of all tile embeddings, based on spatial similarity among all samples, and performed Louvain clustering of the resultant feature latent space. We identified 33 conserved tissue structures (FTU) consisting of 15 to 78 spatially coordinated image features each. We quantified the feature prominence in each sample through feature spatial aggregation and compared FTU quantitation to gene expression programs and clinical features in 1459 breast cancers from TCGA and TCC. Almost half of the FTU’s correlated strongly with molecular subtypes (ER, PR, HER2 status, p<0.05) and every identified FTU associated with a gene expression module. This included gene expression modules associated with lymphocyte infiltration, which paired immune related gene expression modules with at least two FTUs. Additionally, one FTU (FTU-14) correlated significantly (p=0.03) with microbial abundance, derived from RNA-Seq, suggesting bacteria may impact local tissue structure, detectable in H&E images. This work highlights the growing appreciation for spatial ecology in tumors and particularly breast cancer tissue structure. We also demonstrates that computationally-identifiable, conserved tissue structures in breast cancer, derived from digital pathology, can serve as a biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis, with direct relationship to biology and clinical course. Citation Format: Jordan E. Krull, Mirage Modi, Yi Jiang, Karthik Chakravarthy, Daniel Spakowicz, Qin Ma. Large Scale, AI-Enabled, Spatial Signal Processing of Breast Cancer Pathology Identifies Consensus Tissue Structures Related to Biology and Outcomes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning; 2025 Jul 10-12; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(13_Suppl):Abstract nr B048.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.436 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer Research→Same topicAI in cancer detection→French-language works237,207→