Novel biomarker SARIFA in colorectal cancer: highly prognostic, not genetically driven and histologic indicator of a distinct tumor biology.

SARIFA (Stroma AReactive Invasion Front Areas) has recently emerged as a promising histopathological biomarker for colon and gastric cancer. To elucidate the underlying tumor biology, we assessed SARIFA-status in tissue specimens from The-Cancer-Genome-Atlas (TCGA) cohorts COAD (colonic adenocarcinoma) and READ (rectal adenocarcinoma). For the final analysis, 207 CRC patients could be included, consisting of 69 SARIFA-positive and 138 SARIFA-negative cases. In this external validation cohort, H&E-based SARIFA-positivity was strongly correlated with unfavorable overall, disease-specific, and progression-free survival, partly outperforming conventional prognostic factors. SARIFA-positivity was not associated with known high-risk genetic profiles, such as BRAF V600E mutations or microsatellite-stable status. Transcriptionally, SARIFA-positive CRCs exhibited an overlap with CRC consensus molecular subtypes CMS1 and CMS4, along with distinct differential gene expression patterns, linked to lipid metabolism and increased stromal cell infiltration scores (SIIS). Gene-expression-based drug sensitivity prediction revealed a differential treatment response in SARIFA-positive CRCs. In conclusion, SARIFA represents the H&E-based counterpart of an aggressive tumor biology, demonstrating a partial overlap with CMS1/4 and also adding a further biological layer related to lipid metabolism. Our findings underscore SARIFA-status as an ideal biomarker for refined patient stratification and novel drug developments, particularly given its cost-effective assessment based on routinely available H&E slides.

Direct image to subtype prediction for brain tumors using deep learning.

Background: Deep Learning (DL) can predict molecular alterations of solid tumors directly from routine histopathology slides. Since the 2021 update of the World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic criteria, the classification of brain tumors integrates both histopathological and molecular information. We hypothesize that DL can predict molecular alterations as well as WHO subtyping of brain tumors from hematoxylin and eosin-stained histopathology slides. Methods: We used weakly supervised DL and applied it to three large cohorts of brain tumor samples, comprising N = 2845 patients. Results: We found that the key molecular alterations for subtyping, IDH and ATRX, as well as 1p19q codeletion, were predictable from histology with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.95, 0.90, and 0.80 in the training cohort, respectively. These findings were upheld in external validation cohorts with AUROCs of 0.90, 0.79, and 0.87 for prediction of IDH, ATRX, and 1p19q codeletion, respectively. Conclusions: In the future, such DL-based implementations could ease diagnostic workflows, particularly for situations in which advanced molecular testing is not readily available.

Deep learning trained on lymph node status predicts outcome from gastric cancer histopathology: a retrospective multicentric study.

AIM: Gastric cancer (GC) is a tumour entity with highly variant outcomes. Lymph node metastasis is a prognostically adverse biomarker. We hypothesised that GC primary tissue contains information that is predictive of lymph node status and patient prognosis and that this information can be extracted using deep learning (DL). METHODS: Using three patient cohorts comprising 1146 patients, we trained and validated a DL system to predict lymph node status directly from haematoxylin and eosin-stained GC tissue sections. We investigated the concordance between the DL-based prediction from the primary tumour slides (aiN score) and the histopathological lymph node status (pN). Furthermore, we assessed the prognostic value of the aiN score alone and when combined with the pN status. RESULTS: The aiN score predicted the pN status reaching area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.71 in the training cohort and 0.69 and 0.65 in the two test cohorts. In a multivariate Cox analysis, the aiN score was an independent predictor of patient survival with hazard ratios of 1.5 in the training cohort and of 1.3 and 2.2 in the two test cohorts. A combination of the aiN score and the pN status prognostically stratified patients by survival with p-values <0.05 in logrank tests. CONCLUSION: GC primary tumour tissue contains additional prognostic information that is accessible using the aiN score. In combination with the pN status, this can be used for personalised management of GC patients after prospective validation.