Fig. 5: Example of tiles from HPCs associated with lower risk of poor outcome.

a Example of tiles randomly selected from certain HPCs leading to prediction of good outcome. b The interaction analysis between HPCs shows two groups of HPCs which tend to be adjacent on slides; each column shows the normalized proportion of interactions each tile associated with a given HPC has with HPCs associated with its adjacent tiles. The dendrograms correspond to bi-hierarchical clustering of HPCs. c, d Examples of data from patients who have not recurred and have been followed for more than three years. For each case, a small portion of the original slide is shown as well as the corresponding heatmap and the associated SHAP decision plot. The color of the heatmap shows the HPC associated with each tile, with the proportion of tile belonging to each HPC shown in the legend (percentages computed over the whole slide(s) available for each patient). The top of the SHAP decision plot shows the predicted value which determines the color of the curve. Reading from bottom to top, the SHAP values for each HPC are cumulatively summed, and the HPCs are ordered according to the absolute SHAP weight. On the right, the proportion of tiles associated with each cluster is shown on a Log10 scale. All tiles are shown after Reinhard’s color normalization⁴⁷.