Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35513774›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2022

Leveraging artificial intelligence to predict ERG gene fusion status in prostate cancer.

Vipulkumar Dadhania, Daniel Gonzalez, Mustafa Yousif, Jerome Cheng, Todd M Morgan, Daniel E Spratt, Zachery R Reichert, Rahul Mannan, Xiaoming Wang, Anya Chinnaiyan and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Artificial intelligence in prostate cancer.Chinese medical journal · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Artificial intelligence applications in prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Predicting Prostate Cancer Molecular Subtype With Deep Learning on Histopathologic Images.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Vipulkumar DadhaniaDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Daniel GonzalezDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA.
Mustafa YousifDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jerome ChengDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Todd M MorganDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Daniel E SprattDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Zachery R ReichertDepartment of Medical Oncology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Rahul MannanMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Xiaoming WangMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Anya ChinnaiyanMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Xuhong CaoMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Saravana M DhanasekaranMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Arul M ChinnaiyanDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Liron PantanowitzDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Rohit MehraDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. mrohit@med.umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6955-8884
University of Michigan · USMichigan Center for Translational Pathology · USHoward Hughes Medical Institute · USJackson Memorial Hospital · USUniversity Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tissue/InformaticsP50CA186786 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Ganesh S Palapattu · 2014 to 2026
$27.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA186786
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement, the most common E26 transformation specific (ETS) gene fusion within prostate cancer, is known to contribute to the pathogenesis of this disease and carries diagnostic annotations for prostate cancer patients clinically. The ERG rearrangement status in prostatic adenocarcinoma currently cannot be reliably identified from histologic features on H&E-stained slides alone and hence requires ancillary studies such as immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) or next generation sequencing (NGS) for identification.

methods

objectiveWe accordingly sought to develop a deep learning-based algorithm to identify ERG rearrangement status in prostatic adenocarcinoma based on digitized slides of H&E morphology alone.

designSetting, and Participants: Whole slide images from 392 in-house and TCGA cases were employed and annotated using QuPath. Image patches of 224 × 224 pixel were exported at 10 ×, 20 ×, and 40 × for input into a deep learning model based on MobileNetV2 convolutional neural network architecture pre-trained on ImageNet. A separate model was trained for each magnification. Training and test datasets consisted of 261 cases and 131 cases, respectively. The output of the model included a prediction of ERG-positive (ERG rearranged) or ERG-negative (ERG not rearranged) status for each input patch. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Various accuracy measurements including area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the deep learning model. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: All models showed similar ROC curves with AUC results ranging between 0.82 and 0.85. The sensitivity and specificity of these models were 75.0% and 83.1% (20 × model), respectively.

conclusionsA deep learning-based model can successfully predict ERG rearrangement status in the majority of prostatic adenocarcinomas utilizing only H&E-stained digital slides. Such an artificial intelligence-based model can eliminate the need for using extra tumor tissue to perform ancillary studies in order to assess for ERG gene rearrangement in prostatic adenocarcinoma.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaProstatic NeoplasmsArtificial IntelligenceGene FusionHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMaleOncogene Proteins, FusionTranscriptional Regulator ERGERG protein, humanOncogene Proteins, FusionTranscriptional Regulator ERGAdenocarcinomaArtificial intelligenceDeep learningERGGene fusionProstate cancerWhole slide imaging

Identifiers

PMID35513774
PMCPMC9069768
OpenAlexW4229056536

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.