External Validation of a Digital Pathology-based Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Architecture in the NRG/RTOG 9902 Phase 3 Trial.

Artificial intelligence Biomarker Digital histopathology Prostate cancer

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
31 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 12 10 2023
revised: 02 12 2023
accepted: 05 01 2024
medline: 2 2 2024
pubmed: 2 2 2024
entrez: 1 2 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality). Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models. The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm. We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care. This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS METHODS
Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality).
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS METHODS
Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38302323
pii: S2588-9311(24)00029-4
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.004
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Ashley E Ross (AE)

Department of Urology, Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: ashley.ross@nm.org.

Jingbin Zhang (J)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Huei-Chung Huang (HC)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Rikiya Yamashita (R)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Jessica Keim-Malpass (J)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Jeffry P Simko (JP)

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Sandy DeVries (S)

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Todd M Morgan (TM)

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Luis Souhami (L)

The Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), Montreal, QC, Canada.

Michael C Dobelbower (MC)

University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL, USA.

L Scott McGinnis (LS)

Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA.

Christopher U Jones (CU)

Sutter Medical Center Sacramento, Sacramento, CA, USA.

Robert T Dess (RT)

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Kenneth L Zeitzer (KL)

Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Kwang Choi (K)

Brooklyn MB-CCOP/SUNY Downstate, Brooklyn, NY, USA.

Alan C Hartford (AC)

Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.

Jeff M Michalski (JM)

Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.

Adam Raben (A)

Christiana Care Health Services, Inc. CCOP, Wilmington, DE, USA.

Leonard G Gomella (LG)

Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

A Oliver Sartor (AO)

Tulane University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Seth A Rosenthal (SA)

Sutter Medical Center Sacramento, Sacramento, CA, USA.

Howard M Sandler (HM)

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Daniel E Spratt (DE)

UH Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Stephanie L Pugh (SL)

NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center and American College of Radiology, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Osama Mohamad (O)

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Andre Esteva (A)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Emmalyn Chen (E)

Artera Inc., Los Altos, CA, USA.

Edward M Schaeffer (EM)

Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.

Phuoc T Tran (PT)

University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Felix Y Feng (FY)

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Classifications MeSH