Yang, William

Abstract Deep learning models enable the prediction of clinical endpoints from whole-slide images (WSIs), but many such models function as “black boxes”, lacking transparency about whether and which histomorphological patterns drive their predictions, hindering interpretability and clinical adoption. Here we propose a human-in-the-loop explanation framework, MorphoXAI, which provides both local and global interpretability for deep learning models by incorporating human-expert interpretations. At the global level, it reveals the histomorphological patterns on which the model consistently relies to distinguish between classes of WSIs, as well as the patterns associated with confusion between classes. At the local level, it indicates which of these patterns are used in the prediction of an individual WSI and which regions within the slide correspond to such patterns. We validated our method on a deep learning model trained for ovarian tumor histologic subtype prediction. The results show that our framework generates explanations that accurately reflect the histomorphology underlying the model’s predictions at both global and local levels. For interpretability and clinical utility in diagnostic contexts, human evaluation results showed that our explanations were easy to interpret, rich in diagnostic features, and directly helpful for diagnostic decision-making, thereby enhancing pathologist-AI collaboration. Our work highlights that unifying global and local explanations and grounding them in expert-interpreted morphology enhances the interpretability and verifiability of deep learning models, thereby facilitating the transparent deployment of such models in clinical practice.

Abstract Background The risks of breast cancer in African American (AA) women associated with inherited mutations in breast cancer predisposition genes are not well defined. Thus, whether multigene germline hereditary cancer testing panels are applicable to this population is unknown. We assessed associations between mutations in panel-based genes and breast cancer risk in 5054 AA women with breast cancer and 4993 unaffected AA women drawn from 10 epidemiologic studies. Methods Germline DNA samples were sequenced for mutations in 23 cancer predisposition genes using a QIAseq multiplex amplicon panel. Prevalence of mutations and odds ratios (ORs) for associations with breast cancer risk were estimated with adjustment for study design, age, and family history of breast cancer. Results Pathogenic mutations were identified in 10.3% of women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, 5.2% of women with ER-positive breast cancer, and 2.3% of unaffected women. Mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 were associated with high risks of breast cancer (OR = 47.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 10.43 to >100; OR = 7.25, 95% CI = 4.07 to 14.12; OR = 8.54, 95% CI = 3.67 to 24.95, respectively). RAD51D mutations were associated with high risk of ER-negative disease (OR = 7.82, 95% CI = 1.61 to 57.42). Moderate risks were observed for CHEK2, ATM, ERCC3, and FANCC mutations with ER-positive cancer, and RECQL mutations with all breast cancer. Conclusions The study identifies genes that predispose to breast cancer in the AA population, demonstrates the validity of current breast cancer testing panels for use in AA women, and provides a basis for increased referral of AA patients for cancer genetic testing.