MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154164391 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt610

A pathway-based data integration framework for prediction of disease progression

2013· article· en· W2154164391 on OpenAlexfundno aff
José A. Seoane, Ian N.M. Day, Tom R. Gaunt, Colin Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Cancer AgencyEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilUniversity of BristolCancer Research UK
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningFeature selectionArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Predictive modellingData miningData type

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Within medical research there is an increasing trend toward deriving multiple types of data from the same individual. The most effective prognostic prediction methods should use all available data, as this maximizes the amount of information used. In this article, we consider a variety of learning strategies to boost prediction performance based on the use of all available data. IMPLEMENTATION: We consider data integration via the use of multiple kernel learning supervised learning methods. We propose a scheme in which feature selection by statistical score is performed separately per data type and by pathway membership. We further consider the introduction of a confidence measure for the class assignment, both to remove some ambiguously labeled datapoints from the training data and to implement a cautious classifier that only makes predictions when the associated confidence is high. RESULTS: We use the METABRIC dataset for breast cancer, with prediction of survival at 2000 days from diagnosis. Predictive accuracy is improved by using kernels that exclusively use those genes, as features, which are known members of particular pathways. We show that yet further improvements can be made by using a range of additional kernels based on clinical covariates such as Estrogen Receptor (ER) status. Using this range of measures to improve prediction performance, we show that the test accuracy on new instances is nearly 80%, though predictions are only made on 69.2% of the patient cohort. AVAILABILITY: https://github.com/jseoane/FSMKL CONTACT: J.Seoane@bristol.ac.uk SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207