Back

Clinical Validation of RlapsRisk BC in an international multi-cohorts setting.

Gaury, V.; Vaquette, Z.; Aubert, V.; Barcenas, C.; Jones, L. J.; Jacobs, D.; Guillon, J.; Filiot, A.; van der Vegt, B.; Hocquet, E.; Maisin, C.; Spary, L. K.; Bateson, M.; Martin, A.- L.; Drubay, D.; Everhard, S.; Guillou, L.; Sefta, M.; Garberis, I.; Andre, F.; Salomon, A. V.; Krishnamurthy, S.; Lacroix-Triki, M.

2025-07-23 oncology
10.1101/2025.07.18.25331788 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeThis study evaluated the prognostic performance of RlapsRisk BC, a multimodal deep learning tool designed to predict distant recurrence-free interval (dRFI) in early-stage, ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer using routine H&E-stained whole-slide images (WSIs) and standard clinicopathologic features. MethodsRlapsRisk BC was developed and internally validated on seven retrospective cohorts totaling 6,039 patients. Its ability to stratify patients into high- and low-risk groups for dRFI was then assessed in a blinded, retrospective validation across three independent international cohorts (UK, France, USA), including 591 patients with non-metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. ResultsAcross all validation cohorts, RlapsRisk BC showed strong prognostic performance, stratifying patients into distinct low- and high-risk groups with hazard ratios from 3.93 to 9.05. At 5 years, distant recurrence ranged from 0.85%-4.7% in low-risk vs. 6.39%-34.8% in high-risk groups. This separation remained robust across subgroups, including grade 2 tumors, menopausal status, and nodal involvement. RlapsRisk BC was also an independent prognostic factor and improved performance when combined with clinical variables (age, tumor size, nodal status). It increased the c-index by 0.08, 0.19, and 0.20 across the three cohorts, with significant improvement in two. Compared to genomic assays, RlapsRisk BC showed complementary--and sometimes superior--performance, particularly for identifying low-risk patients. At matched specificity, it achieved higher sensitivity: 0.85 vs. 0.33 (Oncotype DX) and 0.74 vs. 0.49 (EndoPredict). ConclusionRlapsRisk BC demonstrates strong, independent prognostic value and may offer a scalable, accessible alternative to genomic assays. Further studies are needed to confirm clinical utility and support integration into treatment decisions. ContextO_ST_ABSKey ObjectiveC_ST_ABSThis study aimed to assess whether RlapsRisk BC, a digital pathology-based AI model, can provide clinically meaningful prognostic stratification in ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. The AI model combines standard histology exhibited in whole slide images of hematoxylin and eosin stained tissue sections and clinical data. The prognostic performance of RlapsRisk BC was evaluated across multiple independent patient cohorts. Knowledge GeneratedThe study demonstrates that RlapsRisk BC offers independent prognostic value beyond established clinical variables and genomic assays. It consistently stratifies patients into high- and low-risk groups for distant recurrence, with reproducible performance across diverse and independent cohorts, supporting its potential integration into routine clinical decision-making. RelevanceRlapsRisk BC may serve as a scalable alternative or adjunct to molecular assays, supporting more personalized and accessible treatment decisions in breast cancer, particularly in settings where genomic testing is unavailable, limited, or yields intermediate-risk results.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Breast Cancer Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.9%
2
npj Breast Cancer
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
3
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.8%
5
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
6
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
7
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
9
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
10
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
12
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.6%
13
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
14
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.9%
15
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.7%
16
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
18
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
19
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
20
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
21
BMC Research Notes
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
22
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
23
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.7%
25
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.7%
26
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
28
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%