Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Computer extracted gland features from H&E predicts prostate cancer recurrence comparably to a genomic companion diagnostic test: a large multi-site study

  • Patrick Leo
  • , Andrew Janowczyk
  • , Robin Elliott
  • , Nafiseh Janaki
  • , Kaustav Bera
  • , Rakesh Shiradkar
  • , Xavier Farré
  • , Pingfu Fu
  • , Ayah El-Fahmawi
  • , Mohammed Shahait
  • , Jessica Kim
  • , David Lee
  • , Kosj Yamoah
  • , Timothy R. Rebbeck
  • , Francesca Khani
  • , Brian D. Robinson
  • , Lauri Eklund
  • , Ivan Jambor
  • , Harri Merisaari
  • , Otto Ettala
  • Pekka Taimen, Hannu J. Aronen, Peter J. Boström, Ashutosh Tewari, Cristina Magi-Galluzzi, Eric Klein, Andrei Purysko, Natalie NC Shih, Michael Feldman, Sanjay Gupta, Priti Lal, Anant Madabhushi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations

Abstract

Existing tools for post-radical prostatectomy (RP) prostate cancer biochemical recurrence (BCR) prognosis rely on human pathologist-derived parameters such as tumor grade, with the resulting inter-reviewer variability. Genomic companion diagnostic tests such as Decipher tend to be tissue destructive, expensive, and not routinely available in most centers. We present a tissue non-destructive method for automated BCR prognosis, termed "Histotyping", that employs computational image analysis of morphologic patterns of prostate tissue from a single, routinely acquired hematoxylin and eosin slide. Patients from two institutions (n = 214) were used to train Histotyping for identifying high-risk patients based on six features of glandular morphology extracted from RP specimens. Histotyping was validated for post-RP BCR prognosis on a separate set of n = 675 patients from five institutions and compared against Decipher on n = 167 patients. Histotyping was prognostic of BCR in the validation set (p < 0.001, univariable hazard ratio [HR] = 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.03–3.93, concordance index [c-index] = 0.68, median years-to-BCR: 1.7). Histotyping was also prognostic in clinically stratified subsets, such as patients with Gleason grade group 3 (HR = 4.09) and negative surgical margins (HR = 3.26). Histotyping was prognostic independent of grade group, margin status, pathological stage, and preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (multivariable p < 0.001, HR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.40–3.10, n = 648). The combination of Histotyping, grade group, and preoperative PSA outperformed Decipher (c-index = 0.75 vs. 0.70, n = 167). These results suggest that a prognostic classifier for prostate cancer based on digital images could serve as an alternative or complement to molecular-based companion diagnostic tests.

Original languageEnglish
Article number35
Journalnpj Precision Oncology
Volume5
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Computer extracted gland features from H&E predicts prostate cancer recurrence comparably to a genomic companion diagnostic test: a large multi-site study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this