Patrick Leo1, Sacheth Chandramouli1, Xavier Farré2, Robin Elliott3, Andrew Janowczyk4, Kaustav Bera1, Pingfu Fu5, Nafiseh Janaki6, Ayah El-Fahmawi7, Mohammed Shahait7, Jessica Kim7, David Lee7, Kosj Yamoah8, Timothy R Rebbeck9, Francesca Khani10, Brian D Robinson10, Natalie N C Shih11, Michael Feldman11, Sanjay Gupta12, Jesse McKenney13, Priti Lal11, Anant Madabhushi14. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA. 2. Public Health Agency of Catalonia, Lleida, Catalonia, Spain. 3. Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland. 5. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA. 6. Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Urology, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 9. T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 10. Departments of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine and Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 11. Department of Pathology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 12. Department of Urology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA; Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Administration Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. 13. Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 14. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA; Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Administration Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: anant.madabhushi@case.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The presence of invasive cribriform adenocarcinoma (ICC), an expanse of cells containing punched-out lumina uninterrupted by stroma, in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens has been associated with biochemical recurrence (BCR). However, ICC identification has only moderate inter-reviewer agreement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate quantitative machine-based assessment of the extent and prognostic utility of ICC, especially within individual Gleason grade groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A machine learning approach was developed for ICC segmentation using 70 RP patients and validated in a cohort of 749 patients from four sites whose median year of surgery was 2007 and with median follow-up of 28 mo. ICC was segmented on one representative hematoxylin and eosin RP slide per patient and the fraction of tumor area composed of ICC, the cribriform area index (CAI), was measured. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association between CAI and BCR was measured in terms of the concordance index (c index) and hazard ratio (HR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: CAI was correlated with BCR (c index 0.62) in the validation set of 411 patients with ICC morphology, especially those with Gleason grade group 2 cancer (n = 192; c index 0.66), and was less prognostic when patients without ICC were included (c index 0.54). A doubling of CAI in the group with ICC morphology was prognostic after controlling for Gleason grade, surgical margin positivity, preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, pathological T stage, and age (HR 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.38; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Automated image analysis and machine learning could provide an objective, quantitative, reproducible, and high-throughput method of quantifying ICC area. The performance of CAI for grade group 2 cancer suggests that for patients with little Gleason 4 pattern, the ICC fraction has a strong prognostic role. PATIENT SUMMARY: Machine-based measurement of a specific cell pattern (cribriform; sieve-like, with lots of spaces) in images of prostate specimens could improve risk stratification for patients with prostate cancer. In the future, this could help in expanding the criteria for active surveillance.
BACKGROUND: The presence of invasive cribriform adenocarcinoma (ICC), an expanse of cells containing punched-out lumina uninterrupted by stroma, in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens has been associated with biochemical recurrence (BCR). However, ICC identification has only moderate inter-reviewer agreement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate quantitative machine-based assessment of the extent and prognostic utility of ICC, especially within individual Gleason grade groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A machine learning approach was developed for ICC segmentation using 70 RP patients and validated in a cohort of 749 patients from four sites whose median year of surgery was 2007 and with median follow-up of 28 mo. ICC was segmented on one representative hematoxylin and eosin RP slide per patient and the fraction of tumor area composed of ICC, the cribriform area index (CAI), was measured. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association between CAI and BCR was measured in terms of the concordance index (c index) and hazard ratio (HR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: CAI was correlated with BCR (c index 0.62) in the validation set of 411 patients with ICC morphology, especially those with Gleason grade group 2 cancer (n = 192; c index 0.66), and was less prognostic when patients without ICC were included (c index 0.54). A doubling of CAI in the group with ICC morphology was prognostic after controlling for Gleason grade, surgical margin positivity, preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, pathological T stage, and age (HR 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.38; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Automated image analysis and machine learning could provide an objective, quantitative, reproducible, and high-throughput method of quantifying ICC area. The performance of CAI for grade group 2 cancer suggests that for patients with little Gleason 4 pattern, the ICC fraction has a strong prognostic role. PATIENT SUMMARY: Machine-based measurement of a specific cell pattern (cribriform; sieve-like, with lots of spaces) in images of prostate specimens could improve risk stratification for patients with prostate cancer. In the future, this could help in expanding the criteria for active surveillance.
Authors: Michel Bolla; Hein van Poppel; Bertrand Tombal; Kris Vekemans; Luigi Da Pozzo; Theo M de Reijke; Antony Verbaeys; Jean-François Bosset; Roland van Velthoven; Marc Colombel; Cees van de Beek; Paul Verhagen; Alphonsus van den Bergh; Cora Sternberg; Thomas Gasser; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Pierre Scalliet; Karin Haustermans; Laurence Collette Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-10-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Peter Ström; Kimmo Kartasalo; Henrik Olsson; Leslie Solorzano; Brett Delahunt; Daniel M Berney; David G Bostwick; Andrew J Evans; David J Grignon; Peter A Humphrey; Kenneth A Iczkowski; James G Kench; Glen Kristiansen; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Katia R M Leite; Jesse K McKenney; Jon Oxley; Chin-Chen Pan; Hemamali Samaratunga; John R Srigley; Hiroyuki Takahashi; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Murali Varma; Ming Zhou; Johan Lindberg; Cecilia Lindskog; Pekka Ruusuvuori; Carolina Wählby; Henrik Grönberg; Mattias Rantalainen; Lars Egevad; Martin Eklund Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Charlotte F Kweldam; Mark F Wildhagen; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Geert J L H van Leenders Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: James J Dignam; Daniel A Hamstra; Herbert Lepor; David Grignon; Harmar Brereton; Adam Currey; Seth Rosenthal; Kenneth L Zeitzer; Varagur M Venkatesan; Eric M Horwitz; Thomas M Pisansky; Howard M Sandler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-12-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Geert J L H van Leenders; Theodorus H van der Kwast; David J Grignon; Andrew J Evans; Glen Kristiansen; Charlotte F Kweldam; Geert Litjens; Jesse K McKenney; Jonathan Melamed; Nicholas Mottet; Gladell P Paner; Hemamali Samaratunga; Ivo G Schoots; Jeffry P Simko; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Murali Varma; Anne Y Warren; Thomas M Wheeler; Sean R Williamson; Kenneth A Iczkowski Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 6.298
Authors: Eva Hollemans; Esther I Verhoef; Chris H Bangma; John Rietbergen; Jozien Helleman; Monique J Roobol; Geert J L H van Leenders Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Weisi Xie; Nicholas P Reder; Can Koyuncu; Patrick Leo; Sarah Hawley; Hongyi Huang; Chenyi Mao; Nadia Postupna; Soyoung Kang; Robert Serafin; Gan Gao; Qinghua Han; Kevin W Bishop; Lindsey A Barner; Pingfu Fu; Jonathan L Wright; C Dirk Keene; Joshua C Vaughan; Andrew Janowczyk; Adam K Glaser; Anant Madabhushi; Lawrence D True; Jonathan T C Liu Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: Vipulkumar Dadhania; Daniel Gonzalez; Mustafa Yousif; Jerome Cheng; Todd M Morgan; Daniel E Spratt; Zachery R Reichert; Rahul Mannan; Xiaoming Wang; Anya Chinnaiyan; Xuhong Cao; Saravana M Dhanasekaran; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Liron Pantanowitz; Rohit Mehra Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 4.638