Table 1 Overview of the Data

Dataset	Years	Collected		Included in study		ER+ slides (%)	PR+ slides (%)	ERBB2+ slides (%)
Dataset	Years	Slides	Patients	Slides	Patients	ER+ slides (%)	PR+ slides (%)	ERBB2+ slides (%)
For development and validation
TCGA	1988–2013	3114	1097	2576	1040	77.6%	67.0%	18.3%
ABCTB	2006–2015	3024	2552	2946	2490	79.3%	71.3%	14.7%
Carmel-Train	2017–2020	5738	1483	5639	1482	88.2%	74.4%	12.7%
Carmel-Test	July 2020–Aug 2021	1872	578	1855	577	88.9%	73.7%	12.8%
For external validation
Haemek	2019–2021	1226	503	981	482	79.3%	49.8%	17.2%
CHUCB	2014–2020	218	183	176	172	87.5%	69.9%	13.1%
Ipatimup	2021–2022	100	100	100	100	83.0%	69.0%	15.1%
For additional experiments
Carmel-Intratumor	2017–2020	502	212	479	207	90.8%	49.7%	5.2%
Carmel-Benign	2020–2021	4051	1454	3965	1440	-	-	-
Carmel-Test-Rescanned	Jan–Aug 2021	467	319	452	315	88.1%	71.0%	13.3%
Total*		19,845	7950	18,717	7783

This study utilized 19,845 slides from 7950 patients across six independent cohorts. See Supplementary Fig. 1 for the distribution of tiles across the cohorts. Exclusions were limited to poorly scanned or tissue-deficient slides. Carmel-Train, TCGA-Train, and ABCTB-Train (CAT-Train) were used for training the models in a cross-validation manner, as well as for hyperparameter tuning. After training, the models were locked and validated on Carmel-Test, ABCTB-Test, and TCGA-Test (CAT-Test). Haemek, CHUCB, and Ipatimup cohorts were used for additional external validation. Carmel-Benign slides were used to explore model performance enhancement by including slides with no cancer. Carmel-Intratumor slides were used to assess the system’s potential to overcome intratumor heterogeneity. Carmel-Test-Rescanned scans were used to evaluate the system’s performance consistency across different scanners.
ER estrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor.
*Carmel-Intratumor and Carmel-Test-Rescanned are a subset of Carmel-Train and Carmel-Test and were not included in the total calculation.

Quick links

Search