用耦合模型融合临床与基因风险评分，发现双高分者预后最差。

Clinical and gene-expression models predict breast cancer outcomes, but simple linear fusion ignores dependence between their risk scores. Using METABRIC, we tested whether modeling the joint distribution of clinical and gene-expression scores improved stratification of 5-year cancer-specific mortality. We defined clinical and mRNA-expression predictor views, trained classifiers, and obtained out-of-fold probabilities through 5-fold cross-validation. The scores were transformed into pseudo-observations on (0,1)^2 and used to fit Gaussian, Clayton, Gumbel, and Frank copulas. The clinical model discriminated better than the gene-expression model (AUC 0.783 vs 0.721). Frank had the smallest goodness-of-fit statistic, with Gaussian performing similarly. Copula fusion did not improve ROC-AUC over the clinical model. However, joint score groups showed clear survival differences, with patients scoring high on both views having the poorest outcomes. Competing-risks analysis showed the same pattern for cancer-death incidence. We also conducted an external evaluation in independent TCGA data using shared predictors and a harmonized 5-year overall-mortality endpoint. Copula-fused, individual, and simple-fusion scores showed comparable discrimination with overlapping confidence intervals. All received the same METABRIC-based recalibration. No gene met the prespecified stability criterion under repeated cross-validated permutation importance, so gene-level findings were treated as exploratory. Copulas provide an explicit, interpretable description of dependence between clinical and gene-expression risk scores and support descriptive joint-group analyses. This methodological study does not establish superior prediction, validated clinical risk categories, or clinical utility.