Jensen, M.

Understanding motor representation in the human brain requires mapping beyond the primary motor cortex, into the distributed networks that coordinate complex movements. The insular cortex, a multifunctional hub buried within the Sylvian fissure, has been implicated in motor control through clinical observations and neuroimaging. Yet its precise relation to primary sensorimotor processing remains one of the least understood aspects of motor neurophysiology. To address this gap, we quantified electrophysiological changes from implanted depth electrodes in patients performing simple movement tasks combined with single-pulse electrical stimulation (SPES) to map effective connectivity. The movement data reveal somatotopically specific representation bilaterally, as well as intereffector regions that are active for different movement types. Hand representation is centered along the contralateral ventral aspect of the middle and posterior short gyri bilaterally, while tongue/mouth tuned sites cluster in the dorsal posterior short gyrus and the dorsal long gyri. Insular activity temporally follows the primary motor cortex (M1) and precedes movement onset. SPES revealed somatotopically specific connectivity between corresponding sites in M1 and insula (hand-to-hand, tongue-to-tongue) and between bilateral insulae. These observations establish that somatotopy is a conserved property of distributed motor control incorporating the insular representations and connectivity.

Abstract Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms based on deep learning approaches show promise in improving breast cancer (BC) detection on mammography and may also improve prediction of future BC risk compared with clinical risk prediction models. Historical clinical risk prediction models underperform among women with BBD; however, AI models for BC detection on mammography have not been tested among women at elevated BC risk due to benign breast disease (BBD). We evaluated if an AI cancer detection algorithm can aid BC risk prediction among women with BBD. Methods: We examined women without a prior BC who had an initial BBD biopsy at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, between 2002 and 2013. Incident BC occurring after BBD was identified using the Mayo Tumor Registry and supplemented by follow-up questionnaires. Only women with a full field digital mammogram at least 2 years prior to BC diagnosis were eligible. A breast pathologist evaluated BBD according to increasing severity, as non-proliferative (NP), proliferative disease without atypia (PDWA) or atypical hyperplasia (AH). AI malignancy scores derived from the Transpara detection algorithm (1-10) and volumetric percent density (VPD) from Volpara (per one standard deviation, SD) were assessed from mammograms close to BBD diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were applied to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs), adjusted for age and BMI. C-statistics were estimated to assess the contribution of each factor to BC risk prediction. Likelihood ratio tests (LRTs) and bootstrapping methods were used to compare model performance with the addition of AI malignancy score. Results: The BBD cohort with mammography consisted of 3,125 women followed for a median 12.9 years, with 250 incident BC. Of these, 221 BC occurred at least two years after the mammogram and were used in analyses. As expected, increased BC risk was associated with BBD severity [for AH HR=3.18 (95%CI: 2.04, 4.95) and for PDWA HR=1.59 (95%CI: 1.17, 2.14) compared to NP] and with higher VPD [HR=1.24 per SD (95% CI: 1.05, 1.45)] (Table ). The AI-malignancy score alone was also associated with BC risk [HR=1.16 per 1 unit score (95%CI: 1.09,1.23)] and showed similar discriminatory accuracy [C-statistic=0.626 (95%CI: 0.586, 0.665)] as the model with BBD severity and VPD combined [C-statistic=0.627, (95%CI: 0.585, 0.669)] (Table ). In models with BBD severity and VPD, the AI-malignancy score was an independent risk factor for BC [HR=1.14 (95%CI: 1.07, 1.21); PLRT<0.001] but only achieved a marginally significant improvement in discriminatory accuracy [C-statistic=0.651 (0.609, 0.693), ΔC-statistic=0.024 (95% CI: 0.000, 0.047)]. Conclusion: In this preliminary study, an AI BC detection algorithm achieved similar performance in predicting future BC risk compared to established risk factors. Citation Format: C. M. Vachon, S. Winham, M. Jensen, D. Hursh, L. Pacheco-Spann, A. Norman, J. Fischer, S. Schrup, L. Seymour, D. Gehling, S. Nyante, M. Troester, N. Karssemeijer, R. Vierkant, D. Radisky, C. Scott, S. I. Maimone, A. Degnim, M. Sherman. An AI algorithm for breast cancer detection improves future BC risk prediction among women with benign breast disease [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-02.