MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract B020: Automated classification of thymic epithelial tumors. A novel deep learning approach

2025· article· en· W4412163732 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matteo Antonio Sacco, Erica Pietroluongo, James M. Dolezal, Anna Di Lello, Mirella Marino, A. Esposito, Maha AT Elsebaie, Marina Chiara Garassino

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep learningPathologyMedicineCancerCancer researchArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Accurate histological classification of thymic epithelial tumours (TETs), including subtypes A, AB, B1, B2, B3, and thymic carcinomas (TC), is essential for prognosis and treatment planning. However, expert-level classification remains challenging due to significant inter-observer variability and the rarity of these tumors. This study presents a novel deep learning approach for subtype classification using digital histopathology. Methods: Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained whole slide images (WSIs) from the Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) were used. The dataset included TETs resections from 119 patients. WSIs were divided into 224×224 pixel patches. We used a foundational model called UNI to extract high-dimensional features. UNI was pretrained on over 100 million histopathology images across 20 major tissue types. We then employed an attention-based Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) model to aggregate patch-level information for slide-level classification. The key innovation in our approach is the implementation of a biologically-informed hierarchical loss function with three components: a multiclass classifier to distinguish A/AB, B1–B3, and TC categories, a binary classifier to differentiate A and AB subtype, and an ordinal classifier to model the biological continuum among B1–B3 subtypes, implemented using a novel binary encoding scheme where each class receives one more "1" bit than the previous class (e.g., B1: [0,0], B2: [1,0], B3: [1,1]). This approach represents the biological continuum of B-subtypes based on increasing epithelial-to-lymphocyte ratios. Results: The model was evaluated using 3-fold cross-validation. Compared to random classification accuracy of only 17%, our model achieved an overall six-class classification accuracy of 59.4% (95% CI: 55.3–63.5) with a Cohen’s kappa of 0.485 (0.437–0.534). When collapsed into three high-level classes (A/AB vs. B1–B3 vs. TC), accuracy improved to 81.0% (76.5–85.5) with a Cohen’s kappa of 0.678 (0.598–0.757). Performance was exceptionally high for TC classification: Accuracy: 95.8% (92.5–99.0), Sensitivity: 94.4% (86.0–100), and Specificity: 96.0% (93.1–98.9). Conclusions: This deep learning approach demonstrates strong performance in classifying TETs subtypes, with especially high accuracy for thymic carcinomas. Prior studies have shown substantial inter-observer variability, with expert reviews at specialized centers resulting in a different histological classification for up to 56% of referred thymic tumor cases—potentially altering treatment decisions in more than 40% of these instances. Our model offers a promising tool to augment diagnostic accuracy and reduce variability, particularly in settings lacking expert pathology review. Citation Format: Matteo Sacco, Erica Pietroluongo, James M. Dolezal, Anna Di Lello, Mirella Marino, Alessandra Esposito, Maha AT. Elsebaie, Marina C. Garassino. Automated classification of thymic epithelial tumors. A novel deep learning approach [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 B020.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging→French-language works237,207→