This study systematically reviews and evaluates published research on machine learning models that integrate histopathology whole slide images and high-throughput -omic data to predict overall survival in cancer. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted through August 12, 2024, with citation screening for additional studies. Eligible studies applied machine learning or deep learning methods to multimodal data combining pathology images and -omics. Data extraction followed the CHARMS checklist, and risk of bias was assessed using the PROBAST + AI tool. Narrative synthesis was conducted in line with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Forty-eight studies published since 2017 met inclusion criteria, spanning 19 cancer types. All relied on The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset. Modelling approaches included regularised Cox regression (n = 4), classical machine learning (n = 13), and deep learning (n = 31). Reported concordance indices ranged from 0.550 to 0.857, with most multimodal models outperforming unimodal counterparts. However, all studies were assessed as having high or unclear risk of bias—most often due to limited external validation, insufficient reporting, and minimal assessment of clinical utility. This review highlights a rapidly evolving yet methodologically underdeveloped field. While model performance is promising, improvements in data standardisation, reporting practices, and real-world contextualisation are critical for clinical translation. This work was funded by the National Pathology Imaging Cooperative (NPIC), supported by UK Research and Innovation (Project no. 104687).
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Charlotte Jennings
Andrew Broad
Lucy Godson
Cancer Informatics
University of Leeds
Linköping University
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jennings et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a03cc3d1c527af8f1ed0269 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/11769351261434523
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: