Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38594327›Full record

ArticleNPJ precision oncology2024

Image-based consensus molecular subtyping in rectal cancer biopsies and response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Maxime W Lafarge, Enric Domingo, Korsuk Sirinukunwattana, Ruby Wood, Leslie Samuel, Graeme Murray, Susan D Richman, Andrew Blake, David Sebag-Montefiore, Simon Gollins and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A review on federated learning in computational pathology.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Maxime W LafargeDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9235-783X
Enric DomingoDepartment of Oncology, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4390-8767
Korsuk SirinukunwattanaGround Truth Labs, Oxford, UK.
Ruby WoodDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Leslie SamuelSchool of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8402-8670
Graeme MurraySchool of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Susan D RichmanLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3993-5041
Andrew BlakeDepartment of Oncology, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8154-6253
David Sebag-MontefioreLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Simon GollinsNorth Wales Cancer Treatment Centre, Besti Cadwaladr University Health Board, Bodelwyddan, UK.
Eckhard KlieserInstitute of Pathology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Daniel NeureiterInstitute of Pathology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Florian HuemerDepartment of Internal Medicine III with Haematology, Medical Oncology, Haemostaseology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Oncologic Center, Salzburg Cancer Research Institute-Laboratory for Immunological and Molecular Cancer Research (SCRI-LIMCR), Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Richard GreilDepartment of Internal Medicine III with Haematology, Medical Oncology, Haemostaseology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Oncologic Center, Salzburg Cancer Research Institute-Laboratory for Immunological and Molecular Cancer Research (SCRI-LIMCR), Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Philip DunneThe Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queens University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9160-283X
Philip QuirkeLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3597-5444
Lukas WeissDepartment of Internal Medicine III with Haematology, Medical Oncology, Haemostaseology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Oncologic Center, Salzburg Cancer Research Institute-Laboratory for Immunological and Molecular Cancer Research (SCRI-LIMCR), Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2174-5613
Jens RittscherDepartment of Engineering Science, Institute of Biomedical Engineering (IBME), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tim MaughanDepartment of Oncology, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Viktor H KoelzerDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. viktor.koelzer@usz.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9206-4885

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of deep learning (DL) models to predict the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) from histopathology images (imCMS) is a promising and cost-effective strategy to support patient stratification. Here, we investigate whether imCMS calls generated from whole slide histopathology images (WSIs) of rectal cancer (RC) pre-treatment biopsies are associated with pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant long course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) with single agent fluoropyrimidine. DL models were trained to classify WSIs of colorectal cancers stained with hematoxylin and eosin into one of the four CMS classes using a multi-centric dataset of resection and biopsy specimens (n = 1057 WSIs) with paired transcriptional data. Classifiers were tested on a held out RC biopsy cohort (ARISTOTLE) and correlated with pCR to LCRT in an independent dataset merging two RC cohorts (ARISTOTLE, n = 114 and SALZBURG, n = 55 patients). DL models predicted CMS with high classification performance in multiple comparative analyses. In the independent cohorts (ARISTOTLE, SALZBURG), cases with WSIs classified as imCMS1 had a significantly higher likelihood of achieving pCR (OR = 2.69, 95% CI 1.01-7.17, p = 0.048). Conversely, imCMS4 was associated with lack of pCR (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.07-0.88, p = 0.031). Classification maps demonstrated pathologist-interpretable associations with high stromal content in imCMS4 cases, associated with poor outcome. No significant association was found in imCMS2 or imCMS3. imCMS classification of pre-treatment biopsies is a fast and inexpensive solution to identify patient groups that could benefit from neoadjuvant LCRT. The significant associations between imCMS1/imCMS4 with pCR suggest the existence of predictive morphological features that could enhance standard pathological assessment.

Identifiers

PMID38594327
PMCPMC11003957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.