ABSTRACT
To assess the usefulness and applications of machine vision (MV) and machine learning (ML) techniques that have been used to develop a single cell-based phenotypic (live and fixed biomarkers) platform that correlates with tumor biological aggressiveness and risk stratification, 100 fresh prostate samples were acquired, and areas of prostate cancer were determined by post-surgery pathology reports logged by an independent pathologist. The prostate samples were dissociated into single-cell suspensions in the presence of an extracellular matrix formulation. These samples were analyzed via live-cell microscopy. Dynamic and fixed phenotypic biomarkers per cell were quantified using objective MV software and ML algorithms. The predictive nature of the ML algorithms was developed in two stages. First, random forest (RF) algorithms were developed using 70% of the samples. The developed algorithms were then tested for their predictive performance using the blinded test dataset that contained 30% of the samples in the second stage. Based on the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve analysis, thresholds were set to maximize both sensitivity and specificity. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of the assay by comparing the algorithm-generated predictions with adverse pathologic features in the radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. Using MV and ML algorithms, the biomarkers predictive of adverse pathology at RP were ranked and a prostate cancer patient risk stratification test was developed that distinguishes patients based on surgical adverse pathology features. The ability to identify and track large numbers of individual cells over the length of the microscopy experimental monitoring cycles, in an automated way, created a large biomarker dataset of primary biomarkers. This biomarker dataset was then interrogated with ML algorithms used to correlate with post-surgical adverse pathology findings. Algorithms were generated that predicted adverse pathology with >0.85 sensitivity and specificity and an AUC (area under the curve) of >0.85. Phenotypic biomarkers provide cellular and molecular details that are informative for predicting post-surgical adverse pathologies when considering tumor biopsy samples. Artificial intelligence ML-based approaches for cancer risk stratification are emerging as important and powerful tools to compliment current measures of risk stratification. These techniques have capabilities to address tumor heterogeneity and the molecular complexity of prostate cancer. Specifically, the phenotypic test is a novel example of leveraging biomarkers and advances in MV and ML for developing a powerful prognostic and risk-stratification tool for prostate cancer patients.
ABSTRACT
The risk stratification of prostate cancer and breast cancer tumours from patients relies on histopathology, selective genomic testing, or on other methods employing fixed formalin tissue samples. However, static biomarker measurements from bulk fixed-tissue samples provide limited accuracy and actionability. Here, we report the development of a live-primary-cell phenotypic-biomarker assay with single-cell resolution, and its validation with prostate cancer and breast cancer tissue samples for the prediction of post-surgical adverse pathology. The assay includes a collagen-I/fibronectin extracellular-matrix formulation, dynamic live-cell biomarkers, a microfluidic device, machine-vision analysis and machine-learning algorithms, and generates predictive scores of adverse pathology at the time of surgery. Predictive scores for the risk stratification of 59 prostate cancer patients and 47 breast cancer patients, with values for area under the curve in receiver-operating-characteristic curves surpassing 80%, support the validation of the assay and its potential clinical applicability for the risk stratification of cancer patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Enteric Escherichia coli survives the highly acidic environment of the stomach through multiple acid resistance (AR) mechanisms. The most effective system, AR2, decarboxylates externally-derived glutamate to remove cytoplasmic protons and excrete GABA. The first described system, AR1, does not require an external amino acid. Its mechanism has not been determined. The regulation of the multiple AR systems and their coordination with broader cellular metabolism has not been fully explored. RESULTS: We utilized a combination of ChIP-Seq and gene expression analysis to experimentally map the regulatory interactions of four TFs: nac, ntrC, ompR, and csiR. Our data identified all previously in vivo confirmed direct interactions and revealed several others previously inferred from gene expression data. Our data demonstrate that nac and csiR directly modulate AR, and leads to a regulatory network model in which all four TFs participate in coordinating acid resistance, glutamate metabolism, and nitrogen metabolism. This model predicts a novel mechanism for AR1 by which the decarboxylation enzymes of AR2 are used with internally derived glutamate. This hypothesis makes several testable predictions that we confirmed experimentally. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the regulatory network underlying AR is complex and deeply interconnected with the regulation of GABA and glutamate metabolism, nitrogen metabolism. These connections underlie and experimentally validated model of AR1 in which the decarboxylation enzymes of AR2 are used with internally derived glutamate.
