ArticleJAMA network open2023
Pathologist Validation of a Machine Learning-Derived Feature for Colon Cancer Risk Stratification.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Direct tumour-adipocyte contact / Stroma AReactive Invasion Front Area (TAC/SARIFA) predicts adverse outcome in colorectal cancer: a focused evidence synthesis and meta-analysis.Histopathology · 2026Pooled it
- Advancements in Image-Based Analyses for Morphology and Staging of Colon Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.BioMed research international · 2025Pooled it
- Development of a Computational Histology Artificial Intelligence-Powered Prognostic Biomarker in Colorectal Cancer in The Cancer Genome Atlas.World journal of oncology · 2026Article
- SARIFA and Lipid Metabolic Reprogramming in Prostate Cancer: Fundamental Mechanisms, Tumor Microenvironment, and Novel Biomarker Prospects.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Advancing AI for multi-omics and clinical data integration in basic and translational cancer research.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- What practicing pathologists and oncologists should know about the new computational pathology-based companion diagnostic tools.The Journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Deep learning-based H&E-derived risk scores in colorectal cancer: associations with tumour morphology, biology, and predicted drug response.The Journal of pathology · 2026Article
- A multimodal approach integrating NK cell-associated gene signatures and pathomics to predict colon adenocarcinoma prognosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into colorectal cancer reporting.The Journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Debating the pros and cons of computational pathology at the European Congress of Pathology (ECP) 2024.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Navigating the landscape of personalized oncology: overcoming challenges and expanding horizons with computational modeling.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Exploring Machine Learning Approaches for Decision Support in Neoadjuvant Therapy of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Oncology research · 2026Article
- Aligning computational pathology with clinical practice for colorectal cancer.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in cancer: applications, challenges, and future perspectives.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- The routine use of a digital tool for the tumor cell fraction quantification in molecular pathology: an international validation of QuANTUM.Pathologica · 2025Article
- Article
- Digital counting of tissue cells for molecular analysis: the QuANTUM pipeline.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Knowledge-Informed Machine Learning for Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis: A Review.IEEE transactions on automation science and engineering : a publication of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society · 2025Article
- Converging deep learning and human-observed tumor-adipocyte interaction as a biomarker in colorectal cancer.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- The SARIFA biomarker in the context of basic research of lipid-driven cancers.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Identifying new prognostic features in colon cancer has the potential to refine histopathologic review and inform patient care. Although prognostic artificial intelligence systems have recently demonstrated significant risk stratification for several cancer types, studies have not yet shown that the machine learning-derived features associated with these prognostic artificial intelligence systems are both interpretable and usable by pathologists. Objective: To evaluate whether pathologist scoring of a histopathologic feature previously identified by machine learning is associated with survival among patients with colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used deidentified, archived colorectal cancer cases from January 2013 to December 2015 from the University of Milano-Bicocca. All available histologic slides from 258 consecutive colon adenocarcinoma cases were reviewed from December 2021 to February 2022 by 2 pathologists, who conducted semiquantitative scoring for tumor adipose feature (TAF), which was previously identified via a prognostic deep learning model developed with an independent colorectal cancer cohort. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prognostic value of TAF for overall survival and disease-specific survival as measured by univariable and multivariable regression analyses. Interpathologist agreement in TAF scoring was also evaluated. Results: A total of 258 colon adenocarcinoma histopathologic cases from 258 patients (138 men [53%]; median age, 67 years [IQR, 65-81 years]) with stage II (n = 119) or stage III (n = 139) cancer were included. Tumor adipose feature was identified in 120 cases (widespread in 63 cases, multifocal in 31, and unifocal in 26). For overall survival analysis after adjustment for tumor stage, TAF was independently prognostic in 2 ways: TAF as a binary feature (presence vs absence: hazard ratio [HR] for presence of TAF, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.07-2.25]; P = .02) and TAF as a semiquantitative categorical feature (HR for widespread TAF, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.23-2.85]; P = .004). Interpathologist agreement for widespread TAF vs lower categories (absent, unifocal, or multifocal) was 90%, corresponding to a κ metric at this threshold of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.58-0.80). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prognostic study, pathologists were able to learn and reproducibly score for TAF, providing significant risk stratification on this independent data set. Although additional work is warranted to understand the biological significance of this feature and to establish broadly reproducible TAF scoring, this work represents the first validation to date of human expert learning from machine learning in pathology. Specifically, this validation demonstrates that a computationally identified histologic feature can represent a human-identifiable, prognostic feature with the potential for integration into pathology practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.