Michael Hoffmeister

Dr. Michael Hoffmeister

German Cancer Research Center, Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, Heidelberg, Germany
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 June 2019 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JKJakob Nikolas Kather
Jakob Nikolas Kather
APAlexander T. Pearson
Alexander T. Pearson
NHNiels Halama
Niels Halama
DJDirk Jäger
Dirk Jäger
JKJeremias Krause
Jeremias Krause
TLTom Lüdde
Tom Lüdde

24 January 2019 in PLOS Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JKJakob Nikolas Kather
Jakob Nikolas Kather
JKJohannes Krisam
Johannes Krisam
PCPornpimol Charoentong
Pornpimol Charoentong
TLTom Luedde
Tom Luedde
EHEsther Herpel
Esther Herpel
NHNiels Halama
Niels Halama
For virtually every patient with colorectal cancer (CRC), hematoxylin–eosin (HE)–stained tissue slides are available. These images contain quantitative information, which is not routinely used to objectively extract prognostic biomarkers. In the present study, we investigated whether deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) can extract prognosticators directly from these widely available images. We hand-delineated single-tissue regions in 86 CRC tissue slides, yielding more than 100,000 HE image patches, and used these to train a CNN by transfer learning, reaching a nine-class accuracy of >94% in an independent data set of 7,180 images from 25 CRC patients. With this tool, we performed automated tissue decomposition of representative multitissue HE images from 862 HE slides in 500 stage I–IV CRC patients in the The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohort, a large international multicenter collection of CRC tissue. Based on the output neuron activations in the CNN, we calculated a “deep stroma score,” which was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) in a multivariable Cox proportional hazard model (hazard ratio [HR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.99 [1.27–3.12], p = 0.0028), while in the same cohort, manual quantification of stromal areas and a gene expression signature of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) were only prognostic in specific tumor stages. We validated these findings in an independent cohort of 409 stage I–IV CRC patients from the “Darmkrebs: Chancen der Verhütung durch Screening” (DACHS) study who were recruited between 2003 and 2007 in multiple institutions in Germany. Again, the score was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 1.63 [1.14–2.33], p = 0.008), CRC-specific OS (HR 2.29 [1.5–3.48], p = 0.0004), and relapse-free survival (RFS; HR 1.92 [1.34–2.76], p = 0.0004). A prospective validation is required before this biomarker can be implemented in clinical workflows. In our retrospective study, we show that a CNN can assess the human tumor microenvironment and predict prognosis directly from histopathological images.

9 April 2014 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HBHermann Brenner
Hermann Brenner
CSChristian Stock
Christian Stock
MHMichael Hoffmeister
Michael Hoffmeister
Objectives To review, summarise, and compare the evidence for effectiveness of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy in the prevention of colorectal cancer occurrence and deaths. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Data sources PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Two investigators independently extracted characteristics and results of identified studies and performed standardised quality ratings. Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials and observational studies in English on the impact of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in the general population at average risk. Results For screening sigmoidoscopy, four randomised controlled trials and 10 observational studies were identified that consistently found a major reduction in distal but not proximal colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Summary estimates of reduction in distal colorectal cancer incidence and mortality were 31% (95% confidence intervals 26% to 37%) and 46% (33% to 57%) in intention to screen analysis, 42% (29% to 53%) and 61% (27% to 79%) in per protocol analysis of randomised controlled trials, and 64% (50% to 74%) and 66% (38% to 81%) in observational studies. For screening colonoscopy, evidence was restricted to six observational studies, the results of which suggest tentatively an even stronger reduction in distal colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, along with a significant reduction in mortality from cancer of the proximal colon. Indirect comparisons of results of observational studies on screening sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy suggest a 40% to 60% lower risk of incident colorectal cancer and death from colorectal cancer after screening colonoscopy even though this incremental risk reduction was statistically significant for deaths from cancer of the proximal colon only. Conclusions Compelling and consistent evidence from randomised controlled trials and observational studies suggests that screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy prevent most deaths from distal colorectal cancer. Observational studies suggest that colonoscopy compared with flexible sigmoidoscopy decreases mortality from cancer of the proximal colon. This added value should be examined in further research and weighed against the higher costs, discomfort, complication rates, capacities needed, and possible differences in compliance.

4 January 2011 in Annals of Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HBHermann Brenner
Hermann Brenner
JCJenny Chang-Claude
Jenny Chang-Claude
CSChristoph M. Seiler
Christoph M. Seiler
ARAlexander Rickert
Alexander Rickert
MHMichael Hoffmeister
Michael Hoffmeister
Colonoscopy with detection and removal of adenomas is considered a powerful tool to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. However, the degree of protection achievable in a population setting with high-quality colonoscopy resources remains to be quantified. To assess the association between previous colonoscopy and risk for CRC. Population-based case–control study. Rhine-Neckar region of Germany. A total of 1688 case patients with colorectal cancer and 1932 control participants aged 50 years or older. A detailed lifetime history of CRC risk factors and preventive factors, including history and results of previous colonoscopies, and of medical data obtained by self-reports and medical records. Odds ratios of CRC associated with colonoscopy in the preceding 10 years were estimated, after adjustment for sex, age, education level, participation in a general health screening examination, family history of CRC, smoking status, body mass index, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or hormone replacement therapy. Overall, colonoscopy in the preceding 10 years was associated with 77% lower risk for CRC. Adjusted odds ratios for any CRC, right-sided CRC, and left-sided CRC were 0.23 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.27), 0.44 (CI, 0.35 to 0.55), and 0.16 (CI, 0.12 to 0.20), respectively. Strong risk reduction was observed for all cancer stages and all ages, except for right-sided cancer in persons aged 50 to 59 years. Risk reduction increased over the years in both the right and the left colon. The study was observational, with potential for residual confounding and selection bias. Colonoscopy with polypectomy can be associated with strongly reduced risk for CRC in the population setting. Aside from strong risk reduction with respect to left-sided CRC, risk reduction of more than 50% was also seen for right-sided colon cancer. German Research Council and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

3 December 2018 in Nature Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JHJeroen R. Huyghe
Jeroen R. Huyghe
SBStephanie A. Bien
Stephanie A. Bien
THTabitha A. Harrison
Tabitha A. Harrison
HKHyun Min Kang
Hyun Min Kang
SCSai Chen
Sai Chen
UPUlrike Peters
Ulrike Peters
To further dissect the genetic architecture of colorectal cancer (CRC), we performed whole-genome sequencing of 1,439 cases and 720 controls, imputed discovered sequence variants and Haplotype Reference Consortium panel variants into genome-wide association study data, and tested for association in 34,869 cases and 29,051 controls. Findings were followed up in an additional 23,262 cases and 38,296 controls. We discovered a strongly protective 0.3% frequency variant signal at CHD1. In a combined meta-analysis of 125,478 individuals, we identified 40 new independent signals at P < 5 × 10-8, bringing the number of known independent signals for CRC to ~100. New signals implicate lower-frequency variants, Krüppel-like factors, Hedgehog signaling, Hippo-YAP signaling, long noncoding RNAs and somatic drivers, and support a role for immune function. Heritability analyses suggest that CRC risk is highly polygenic, and larger, more comprehensive studies enabling rare variant analysis will improve understanding of biology underlying this risk and influence personalized screening strategies and drug development.

30 March 2008 in Nature Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ATAlbert Tenesa
Albert Tenesa
SFSusan M Farrington
Susan M Farrington
JPJames G D Prendergast
James G D Prendergast
MPMary E Porteous
Mary E Porteous
MWMarion Walker
Marion Walker
MDMalcolm G Dunlop
Malcolm G Dunlop