MELPREDICT: a logistic regression model to estimate CDKN2A carrier probability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heritable alterations in CDKN2A account for a subset of familial melanoma cases although no robust method exists to identify those at risk of being a mutation carrier. METHODS: We set out to construct a model for estimating CDKN2A mutation carrier probability using a cohort of 116 consecutive familial cutaneous melanoma patients evaluated at Massachusetts General Hospital Pigmented Lesion Center between April 2001 and September 2004. Germline CDKN2A and CDK4 status on the familial melanoma cases and clinical features associated with mutational status were then used to build a multiple logistic regression model to predict carrier probability and performance of model on external validation. RESULTS: From the 116 kindreds prone to melanoma in the Boston area, 13 CDKN2A mutation carriers were identified and 12 were subsequently used in the modeling. Proband age at diagnosis, number of proband primaries, and number of additional family primaries were most closely associated with germline mutations. The estimated probability of the proband being a mutation carrier based on the logistic regression model (MELPREDICT) is given by e(L)/(1 + e(L) where L = 1.99+[0.92x(no. of proband primaries)]+[0.74x(no. of additional family primaries)]-[2.11xln(age)]. The mean estimated probabilities for subjects in the Boston dataset were 55.4% and 5.1% for the mutation carriers and non-carriers respectively. In a receiver operator characteristic analysis, the area under the curve was 0.881 (95% confidence interval 0.739 to 1.000) for the Boston model set (n = 116) and 0.803 (0.729 to 0.877) for an external Toronto hereditary melanoma cohort (n = 143). CONCLUSIONS: These results represent the first-iteration logistic regression model to approximate CDKN2A carrier probability. Validation of this model with an external dataset revealed relatively robust performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".