MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Development of a genomic-clinical classifier for predicting progression after radical cystectomy in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer.

2013· article· en· W2590749769 on OpenAlexaff
Anirban P. Mitra, Nicholas Erho, Lucia L.C. Lam, Ismael A. Vergara, Thomas Sierocinski, Benedikt Zimmermann, Zaid Haddad, Mercedeh Ghadessi, Anamaria Crisan, Timothy J. Triche, Siamak Daneshmand, Christine Buerki, Elai Davicioni, Peter C. Black

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaGenome British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyBladder cancerReceiver operating characteristicLogistic regressionClassifier (UML)OncologyInternal medicineCancerArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4542 Background: The mainstay of muscle-invasive bladder cancer treatment is surgical resection with/without multi-agent chemotherapy. Management decisions are based on a small number of clinical and pathologic parameters with poor prognostic and predictive power. There is an urgent need for enhanced biomarkers to guide therapy of this lethal disease. Here we have developed a genomic signature of bladder cancer progression using whole transcriptome profiling technology. Methods: 251 FFPE bladder cancer specimens were obtained from patients undergoing radical cystectomy at the University of Southern California (1998-2004). All patients had pT2-T4a,N0 urothelial carcinoma in the absence of pre-operative chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 5 years. RNA expression levels were measured with 1.4 million feature oligonucleotide microarrays. Patients were divided into a training set (2/3 of cohort) to develop a genomic classifier for risk of progression (defined as any type of bladder cancer recurrence), and a validation set (1/3 of cohort). In parallel, multivariable analysis was used to develop a clinical classifier using typical clinical and pathologic variables. Finally, a genomic-clinical classifier was built combining the genomic classifier with clinical variables using logistic regression. The receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) metric was used to evaluate each classifier in the validation set. Results: The genomic classifier consisted of 89 features corresponding to 80 genes that were combined in a k-nearest neighbor model (KNN89). KNN89 showed an AUC of 0.77 in ROC analysis on the validation set. The best clinical classifier showed an AUC of 0.72. The genomic-clinical classifier demonstrated an AUC of 0.81. Multivariable analysis incorporating all clinical parameters and KNN89 further revealed that KNN89 was the only significant predictor of bladder cancer progression (p=0.0077). Conclusions: We have developed a combined genomic-clinical classifier that shows improved performance over clinical models alone for prediction of progression after radical cystectomy. External validation of this classifier is ongoing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→