IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,254,710
Granted Patent B2
US 12,254,710 · App. 18/493,740 · Granted Mar 18, 2025

Predicting cancer recurrence from spatial multi-parameter cellular and subcellular imaging data

Inventors: Srinivas C. Chennubhotla (Pittsburgh, PA); Douglass L. Taylor (Pittsburgh, PA); Shikhar Uttam Fnu (Pittsburgh, PA)
Assignee: University of Pittsburgh—Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education
G06V20/698G06F18/211G06F18/217G06V10/26G06V10/50G06V10/771G06V10/776G16H30/40G16H50/20G06N20/00G06V2201/03
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,254,710
App. No.
18/493,740
Granted
Mar 18, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method of predicting cancer recurrence risk for an individual includes receiving patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for a tumor of the individual, and analyzing the patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data using a prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk to determine a predicted cancer recurrence risk for the individual, wherein the joint prognostic model is based on spatial correlation statistics among features derived for a plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains from spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data obtained from a plurality of cancer patients.

Claims (45)

1. A method of predicting cancer recurrence risk for an individual, comprising:

receiving patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data labelled with a plurality of different biomarkers for a tumor of the individual;

analyzing the patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data using a joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk to determine a predicted cancer recurrence risk for the individual, wherein the joint prognostic model has been previously developed and trained by:

receiving spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data labelled with the plurality of different biomarkers for a plurality of cancer patients, wherein the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients comprises multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data;

performing a spatial dissection of the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients including cell segmentation to divide the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data into a plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains;

generating a base feature set for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, wherein for each intra-tumor spatial domain the base feature set includes: (i) a computed intensity expression value for each of the plurality of different biomarkers, wherein the computed intensity expression value for each biomarker is a mean intensity value for the biomarker averaged across all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the biomarker, and (ii) a plurality of Kendall rank correlation values, wherein each Kendall rank correlation value is between a respective pair of biomarkers of the plurality of different biomarkers for all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the respective pair of biomarkers;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, determining an optimal subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain by testing each feature of the base feature set of the intra-tumor spatial domain using a regression method and determining those specific features from the base feature set that constitute the optimal subset;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, developing and training a spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk using the optimal subset of features of the intra-tumor spatial domain; and

combining the spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model of each of the intra-tumor spatial domains to form the joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk.

2. The method according to claim 1 , wherein the plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains comprise an epithelial spatial domain, a stromal spatial domain, and an epithelial-stromal domain.

3. The method according to claim 2 , wherein the performing the spatial dissection comprises segmenting the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients into epithelial and stromal regions differentiated by epithelial E-cadherin staining.

4. The method according to claim 2 , wherein the epithelial-stromal domain captures a boundary wherein stroma and malignant epithelial cells interact in close proximity.

5. The method according to claim 1 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain employs recurrence-guided learning.

6. The method according to claim 5 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain employs model selection based on an L1-penalized Cox proportional hazard regression method.

7. The method according to claim 6 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the joint prognostic model has been previously developed and trained by learning coefficients for each feature in the subset of features using L2 penalty in a penalized Cox regression model with only the subset of features be used as inputs.

8. The method according to claim 7 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain further comprises testing for stability of contribution to recurrence prognosis through testing stability of the sign of each of the coefficients at a predetermined threshold.

9. The method according to claim 1 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain comprises testing the biomarkers used to generate the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data together for prognostic power.

10. The method according to claim 1 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain comprises testing the biomarkers used to generate the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data individually for prognostic power.

11. A computer program product, comprising a non-transitory computer usable medium having a computer readable program code embodied therein, the computer readable program code being adapted and configured to be executed to implement a method of predicting cancer recurrence risk for an individual as recited in claim 1 , wherein the computer program product stores the joint prognostic model.

12. An apparatus for predicting cancer recurrence risk for an individual, comprising:

a computer system comprising a processing apparatus implementing a joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk, wherein the processing apparatus is structured and configured to:

receive patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data labelled with a plurality of different biomarkers for a tumor of the individual; and

analyze the patient spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data using the joint prognostic model to determine a predicted cancer recurrence risk for the individual, wherein the joint prognostic model has been previously developed and trained by:

receiving spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data labelled with the plurality of different biomarkers for a plurality of cancer patients, wherein the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients comprises multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data;

performing a spatial dissection of the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients including cell segmentation to divide the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data into a plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains;

generating a base feature set for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, wherein for each intra-tumor spatial domain the base feature set includes: (i) a computed intensity expression value for each of the plurality of different biomarkers, wherein the computed intensity expression value for each biomarker is a mean intensity value for the biomarker averaged across all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the biomarker, and (ii) a plurality of Kendall rank correlation values, wherein each Kendall rank correlation value is between a respective pair of biomarkers of the plurality of different biomarkers for all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the respective pair of biomarkers;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, determining an optimal subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain by testing each feature of the base feature set of the intra-tumor spatial domain using a regression method and determining those specific features from the base feature set that constitute the optimal subset;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, developing and training a spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk using the optimal subset of features of the intra-tumor spatial domain; and

combining the spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model of each of the intra-tumor spatial domains to form the joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk.

13. The apparatus according to claim 12 , wherein the plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains comprise an epithelial spatial domain, a stromal spatial domain, and a an epithelial-stromal domain.

14. The apparatus according to claim 13 , wherein the performing the spatial dissection comprises segmenting the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients into epithelial and stromal regions differentiated by epithelial E-cadherin staining.

15. The apparatus according to claim 13 , wherein the epithelial-stromal domain captures a boundary wherein stroma and malignant epithelial cells interact in close proximity.

16. The apparatus according to claim 12 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain employs recurrence-guided learning.

17. The apparatus according to claim 16 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain employs model selection based on an L1-penalized Cox proportional hazard regression method.

18. The apparatus according to claim 17 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the joint prognostic model has been previously developed and trained by learning coefficients for each feature in the subset of features using L2 penalty in a penalized Cox regression model with only the subset of features be used as inputs.

19. The apparatus according to claim 18 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain further comprises testing for stability of contribution to recurrence prognosis through testing stability of the sign of each of the coefficients at a predetermined threshold.

20. The apparatus according to claim 12 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain comprises testing the biomarkers used to generate the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data together for prognostic power.

21. The apparatus according to claim 12 , wherein, for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, the selecting the subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain comprises testing the biomarkers used to generate the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data individually for prognostic power.

22. A method of creating a joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk, comprising:

receiving spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data labelled with a plurality of different biomarkers for a plurality of cancer patients, wherein the spatial multi-parameter cellular and sub-cellular imaging data for the plurality of cancer patients comprises multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data;

performing spatial dissection including cell segmentation on the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker data to divide the multiplexed immunofluorescence biomarker imaging data into a plurality of intra-tumor spatial domains;

generating a base feature set for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, wherein for each intra-tumor spatial domain the base feature set includes: (i) a computed intensity expression value for each of the plurality of different biomarkers, wherein the computed intensity expression value for each biomarker is a mean intensity value for the biomarker averaged across all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the biomarker, and (ii) a plurality of Kendall rank correlation values, wherein each Kendall rank correlation value is between a respective pair of biomarkers of the plurality of different biomarkers for all cells within the intra-tumor spatial domain expressing the respective pair of biomarkers;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, determining an optimal subset of features from the base feature set for the intra-tumor spatial domain by testing each feature of the base feature set of the intra-tumor spatial domain using a regression method and determining those specific features from the base feature set that constitute the optimal subset;

for each of the intra-tumor spatial domains, developing and training a spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk using the optimal subset of features of the intra-tumor spatial domain;

combining the spatial domain specific multivariate prognostic model of each of the intra-tumor spatial domains to form the joint prognostic model for predicting cancer recurrence risk.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jan 17, 2024
From: CHENNUBHOTLA, SRINIVAS C.; TAYLOR, DOUGLASS L.; FNU, SHIKHAR UTTAM
To: UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH - OF THE COMMONWEALTH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION
Reel/Frame 066142/0850 →
Continuity (3)
Continuation 17056080
Provisional Application 62675832 · May 24, 2018
Related Publication 20240062564A1 · Feb 22, 2024
References Cited (48)
US 20100177950A1 · Donovan et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20120219206A1 · Janowczyk et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130230230A1 · Ajemba et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140127708A1 · Muraca · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150133321A1 · O'Shannessy · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160003829A1 · Bhaumik · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160333421A1 · Boutros et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170091937A1 · Barnes · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170270420A1 · Harder et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170365053A1 · Yuan · 2017 [cited by applicant]
JP 2014519818A · 2014 [cited by applicant]
JP 2017516992A · 2017 [cited by applicant]
JP 2018504674A · 2018 [cited by applicant]
JP 2019534451A · 2019 [cited by applicant]
WO 2012154722A1 · 2012 [cited by applicant]
WO 2013052480A1 · 2013 [cited by applicant]
WO 2015040990A1 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
Rothberg et al. “Construction and analysis of multi-parameter prognostic models for melanoma outcome.” In: Methods Mel Biol. 2014;, (online) (retrieved on Jul. 18, 2019 (Jul. 18, 2019)) Retrieved from the Internet <URL:… [cited by applicant]
Galon, Jerome et al., “Type, Density, and Location of Immune Cells Within Human Colorectal Tumors Predict Clinical Outcome”, vol. 313 Science, www.sciencemag.org, Sep. 29, 2006, 8 pp. (1960-1964). [cited by applicant]
Galon, Jerome et al., Journal of Pathology, J Pathol 2014; 232: Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/path.4287, 11 pp. (199-209). [cited by applicant]
Au, Qingyan et al., “Abstract 5135: Detection of IFNγ induced PDL1expression by combined in situ RNA analysis and proteinprofiling from a single FFPE slide”, Proceedings: AACR 107th Annual Meeting 2016; Apr. 16-20, 2016… [cited by applicant]
Steven J. Potts et al., “Evaluating tumor heterogeneity in immunohistochemistry-stained breast cancer tissue”, www.laboratoryinvestigation.org | Laboratory Investigation | vol. 92 Sep. 2012, pp. 1342-1357. [cited by applicant]
Daniel M. Spagnolo et al., “Pointwise mutual information quantifies intratumor heterogeneity in tissue sections labeled with multiple fluorescent biomarkers”, @ 2016 Journal of Pathology Informatics, http://www.jpathinf… [cited by applicant]
Albert Gough et al., “Biologically Relevant Heterogeneity: Metrics and Practical Insights”, SLAS Discovery 2017, vol. 22(3) 213-237 @ 2017 Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening DOI: 10.1177/2472555216682725 jo… [cited by applicant]
Akif Burak Tosun et al. “Histological Detection of High-Risk Benign Breast Lesions from Whole Slide Images”, Dept. of Computational and Systems Biology, Univ. of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA, Dept. of Pathology, Magee Wo… [cited by applicant]
Luong Nguyen et al., “Spatial Statistics for Segmenting Histological Structures in H&E Stained Tissue Images”, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 36, No. 7, Jul. 2017, http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/… [cited by applicant]
L. Nguyen et al., “Architectural Patterns for Differential Diagnosis of Proliferative Breast Lesions From Histopathological Images”. Department of Computational and Systems Biology, Drug Discovery Institute, Magee Women… [cited by applicant]
C. Chennubhotla et al., “An Assessment of Imaging Informatics for Precision Medicine in Cancer”, @ 2017 IMIA and Schattauer GmbH, IMIA Yearbook of Medical Informatics 2017, 4 pp. (110-119). [cited by applicant]
Albert Gough et al., “High Content Analysis With Cellular and Tissue Systems Biology: a Bridge Between Cancer Cell Biology and Tissue-Based Diagnostics”, Chapter for “The Molecular Basis of Cancer”, 4th Edition (In Pres… [cited by applicant]
Daniel M. Spagnolo et al., “Platform for Quantitative Evaluation of Spatial Intratumoral Heterogeneity in Multiplexed Fluorescence Images”, Focus on Computer Resources, Downloaded from cancerres.aacrjournals.org on May … [cited by applicant]
Alexandre Calon et al “Stromal gene expression defines poor-prognosis subtypes in colorectal cancer”, vol. 47 | No. 4 | Apr. 2015 Nature Genetics, pp. 320-332. [cited by applicant]
Felipe De Sousa E Melo et al., “Poor-prognosis colon cancer is defined by a molecularly distinct subtype and develops from serrated precursor lesions”, vol. 19 | No. 5 | May 2013 Nature Medicine, pp. 614-621. [cited by applicant]
Michael J. Gerdes et al. “Highly multiplexed single-cell analysis of formalinfixed, paraffin-embedded cancer tissue”, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas, 11982-11987 | PNAS | Jul. 16, 2013 | vol. 110 | No. 29, pp. 1-6. [cited by applicant]
Robin K. Kelley, MD et al. “Biomarker Use in Colorectal Cancer Therapy”, NIH Public Access, J Natl Compr Canc Netw. Author manuscript; available in PMC Jul. 1, 2013. Published in final edited form as: J Natl Compr Canc … [cited by applicant]
Richard D. Kennedy et al. “Development and Independent Validation of a Prognostic Assay for Stage II Colon Cancer Using Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue”, Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 29, No. 35, Dec. 10, 2… [cited by applicant]
Laetitia Marisa et al. “Gene Expression Classification of Colon Cancer into Molecular Subtypes: Characterization, Validation, and Prognostic Value”, Molecular Classification of Colon Cancer, PLOS Medicine | www.plosmedi… [cited by applicant]
Anguraj Sadanandam et al. “A colorectal cancer classification system that associates cellular phenotype and responses to therapy”, Nature Medicine vol. 19 | No. 5 | May 2013, pp. 619-626. [cited by applicant]
Geetika Srivastava et al. “ProspectiveMulticenter Study of the Impact of Oncotype DX Colon Cancer Assay Results on Treatment Recommendations in Stage II Colon Cancer Patients”, TheOncologist 2014;19:492-497 www.TheOncol… [cited by applicant]
Ramon Salazar et al. “Gene Expression Signature to Improve Prognosis Prediction of Stage II and III Colorectal Cancer”, J Clin Oncol 29:17-24. @ 2010 by American Society of Clinical Oncology, Downloaded from ascopubs.or… [cited by applicant]
Written Opinion Issued for PCT/US2019/033662, mailed Aug. 16, 2019. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report issued in PCT/US2019/033662, mailed Aug. 16, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Kwak, Jin Tae et al., “Improving prediction of prostate cancer recurrence using chemical imaging”, Scientific reports vol. 5 8758. Mar. 4, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Beck et al., “Systematic Analysis of Breast Cancer Morphology Uncovers Stromal Features Associated with Survival”, www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org, Nov. 9, 2011, vol. 3, Issue 108, pp. 1-11. [cited by applicant]
Camp, Robert L., Gina G. Chung, and David L. Rimm. “Automated subcellular localization and quantification of protein expression in tissue microarrays.” (2002): 1323-1328. (Year: 2002). [cited by applicant]
Sushil Mittal, David Madigan, Randall S. Burd, Marc A. Suchard, High-dimensional, massive sample-size Cox proportional hazards regression for survival analysis, Biostatistics, vol. 15, Issue 2, Apr. 2014, pp. 207-221 (Y… [cited by applicant]
Tosun, A. B. et al. (2017). Histological Detection of High-Risk Benign Breast Lesions from Whole Slide Images. In: Descoteaux, M., Maier-Hein, L., Franz, A., Jannin, P., Collins, D., Duchesne, S. (eds) Medical Image Com… [cited by applicant]
Neumeister, Veronique et al. “In situ identification of putative cancer stem cells by multiplexing ALDH1, CD44, and cytokeratin identifies breast cancer patients with poor prognosis.” The American journal of pathology v… [cited by applicant]
Harder, Nathalie et al. “Tissue Phenomics for prognostic biomarker discovery in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.” Scientific reports vol. 8, 1 4470. Mar. 13, 2018 (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]