Cited by 654Breast Cancer Treatment StudiesCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Multi-omic machine learning predictor of breast cancer therapy response

Open access
Sammut, Stephen-John, Crispin-Ortuzar, Mireia, Chin, Suet-Feung, Provenzano, Elena, Bardwell, Helen A., Ma, Wenxin, Cope, Wei, Dariush, Ali +13 more·2022·Nature

Abstract

Breast cancers are complex ecosystems of malignant cells and the tumour microenvironment 1 . The composition of these tumour ecosystems and interactions within them contribute to responses to cytotoxic therapy 2 . Efforts to build response predictors have not incorporated this knowledge. We collected clinical, digital pathology, genomic and transcriptomic profiles of pre-treatment biopsies of breast tumours from 168 patients treated with chemotherapy with or without HER2 (encoded by ERBB2 )-targeted therapy before surgery. Pathology end points (complete response or residual disease) at surgery 3 were then correlated with multi-omic features in these diagnostic biopsies. Here we show that response to treatment is modulated by the pre-treated tumour ecosystem, and its multi-omics landscape can be integrated in predictive models using machine learning. The degree of residual disease following therapy is monotonically associated with pre-therapy features, including tumour mutational and copy number landscapes, tumour proliferation, immune infiltration and T cell dysfunction and exclusion. Combining these features into a multi-omic machine learning model predicted a pathological complete response in an external validation cohort (75 patients) with an area under the curve of 0.87. In conclusion, response to therapy is determined by the baseline characteristics of the totality of the tumour ecosystem captured through data integration and machine learning. This approach could be used to develop predictors for other cancers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-021-04278-5

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sammut, S.-J., Crispin-Ortuzar, M., Chin, S.-F., Provenzano, E., Bardwell, H. A., Ma, W., Cope, W., Dariush, A., Dawson, S.-J., Abraham, J. E., Dunn, J., Hiller, L., Thomas, J., Cameron, D. A., Bartlett, J. M. S., Hayward, L., Pharoah, P. D., Markowetz, F., Rueda, O. M., Earl, H. M., & Caldas, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • Western General Hospital (GB)
  • Ontario Institute for Cancer Research (CA)
Corresponding author
Caldas, Carlos
Venue
Nature
Published
2021-12-07
Volume
601
Issue
7894
Pages
623-629
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W3216448540
Cited by
654
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 133 · 2025: 186 · 2024: 153 · 2023: 132 · 2022: 50
FWCI
34.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (A29580, 106566/Z/14/Z, 20014, 106566, BRC-1215-20014)
  • Cancer Research UK (A17197, 29567, 28290, A:29580, BRC-1215-20014, S_3525, A19274, A27657, 16942, 19274, 22310)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0515-10090, [IS-BRC-1215-20014, NF-SI-0611-10154, BRC1215-20014, CL-2018-14-503)
  • University of Cambridge (BRC-1215-20014)
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00002/16, BRC-1215-20014)
  • Trinity College, University of Cambridge
  • NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre ((BRC-1215-20014), 1215-20014, BRC-1215, NF-SI-0515-10090)
  • Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge (A29580, A27657, A19274, A17197)
  • H2020 European Research Council (694620)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
breast cancer, treatment response prediction, tumor microenvironment, multi-omics integration, pathological complete response, residual disease, tumor mutational burden, copy number alterations, tumour proliferation, immune cell infiltration, T cell dysfunction, T-cell exclusion, HER2-targeted therapy, chemotherapy, pre-treatment biopsy, digital pathology, transcriptomics, genomic profiling
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Ecosystem, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Genomics, Tumor Microenvironment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review