Abstract B039: Detecting obesity-associated histopathology characteristics in breast cancer using an AI foundation model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Obesity is a known risk factor for breast cancer, particularly in postmenopausal women. Obesity-induced changes, including inflamed adipocytes, may drive tumorigenesis, progression, and metastasis, leading to worse outcomes and reduced therapy response. We hypothesized that histologic patterns in tumor and stromal regions of obese breast cancer patients could serve as features for training AI models that classify BMI. We further hypothesized that these features are more pronounced in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- breast cancer. Methods: H&E-stained tissue samples and clinical data, including BMI, were obtained from the Murtha Cancer Center at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. Samples were digitized with a VS200 Olympus scanner at 20X and split into 380×380-pixel tiles. AI-based filters removed non-tissue tiles, including those with adipose tissue. We used the CanvOI foundation model to generate slide-level embeddings and applied multiple ML classifiers to distinguish high and low BMI patients. Additionally, a CanvOI-based cancer detector isolated tumor and stroma regions, allowing predictions based on the entire tissue, tumor, or stroma regions. Patients with high BMI (≥30) were compared to those with BMI < 25. Patients were grouped into four cohorts: (1) all patients (n=195, 102 with high BMI), (2) ER+/HER2- patients (n=134, 64 high), (3) patients from cohort 1 aged over 50 for postmenopausal selection (n=144, 85 high), and (4) patients from cohort 2 aged over 50 (n=100, 56 high). Pre-menopausal cohorts were excluded due to insufficient cases. Each cohort was split into train and test sets (75/25) for model training and evaluation. Results: The models identified patients with a BMI ≥30, achieving AUC values of 0.71, 0.68, 0.63, and 0.68 across the four cohorts respectively when analyzing the entire tissue. When restricted to tumor regions, the AUC values shifted to 0.71, 0.61, 0.64, and 0.65, respectively, showing similar performance. Using only stromal regions resulted in AUC values of 0.78, 0.62, 0.57, and 0.75 showing a slight improvement for the all-patients group and the post-menopausal ER+/HER2 group. Conclusions: The results confirm the presence of obesity-related signatures in both tumor and stromal regions of H&E-stained tissue. The findings suggest that stromal regions exhibit stronger signatures, reflected by higher AUC values. Subcohort analysis found no clinical or demographic traits that would improve classification performance, suggesting that morphological features associated with high BMI are present in all groups. This study also highlights foundation models’ utility in extracting demographic variables from archival samples. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions or policies of USUHS, HJF, the DoD or the Departments of the Army, Navy or Air Force. Mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Citation Format: Edwin A. Heredia, John Paine, Shiva Patre, Thomas Jonsson, Thomas Keller, Zihang Fang, Valerie Narumi, Irika Katiyar, Ian Lagerstrom, Jamie Lombardo, Jerry S. H. Lee, David B. Agus, Reva Basho, Naim Matasci. Detecting obesity-associated histopathology characteristics in breast cancer using an AI foundation model [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 B039.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".