Cited by 251AI in cancer detectionCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Multistain deep learning for prediction of prognosis and therapy response in colorectal cancer

Foersch, Sebastian, Glasner, Christina, Woerl, Ann-Christin, Eckstein, Markus, Wagner, Daniel-Christoph, Schulz, Stefan, Kellers, Franziska, Fernandez, Aurélie +9 more·2023·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Although it has long been known that the immune cell composition has a strong prognostic and predictive value in colorectal cancer (CRC), scoring systems such as the immunoscore (IS) or quantification of intraepithelial lymphocytes are only slowly being adopted into clinical routine use and have their limitations. To address this we established and evaluated a multistain deep learning model (MSDLM) utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) to determine the AImmunoscore (AIS) in more than 1,000 patients with CRC. Our model had high prognostic capabilities and outperformed other clinical, molecular and immune cell-based parameters. It could also be used to predict the response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with rectal cancer. Using an explainable AI approach, we confirmed that the MSDLM's decisions were based on established cellular patterns of anti-tumor immunity. Hence, the AIS could provide clinicians with a valuable decision-making tool based on the tumor immune microenvironment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41591-022-02134-1

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Foersch, S., Glasner, C., Woerl, A.-C., Eckstein, M., Wagner, D.-C., Schulz, S., Kellers, F., Fernandez, A., Tserea, K., Kloth, M., Hartmann, A., Heintz, A., Weichert, W., Roth, W., Geppert, C., Kather, J. N., & Jesinghaus, M.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Foersch, Sebastian
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2023-01-09
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
430-439
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W4313830579
Cited by
251
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 36
FWCI
23.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (16SV8167)
  • Stage-I-Program of the University Medical Center Mainz Mainz Research School of Translational Biomedicine (TransMed) Manfred-Stolte-Foundation
  • Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (ZMVI1-2520DAT111)
  • Deutsche Krebshilfe (#70113864)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
colorectal cancer, tumor immune microenvironment, immune cell composition, outcome prediction, neoadjuvant therapy response, rectal cancer, explainable AI, antitumor immunity, immune score
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Rectal Neoplasms, Colorectal Neoplasms, 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