A method of gene expression data transfer from cell lines to cancer patients for machine-learning prediction of drug efficiency
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personalized medicine implies that distinct treatment methods are prescribed to individual patients according several features that may be obtained from, e.g., gene expression profile. The majority of machine learning methods suffer from the deficiency of preceding cases, i.e. the gene expression data on patients combined with the confirmed outcome of known treatment methods. At the same time, there exist thousands of various cell lines that were treated with hundreds of anti-cancer drugs in order to check the ability of these drugs to stop the cell proliferation, and all these cell line cultures were profiled in terms of their gene expression. Here we present a new approach in machine learning, which can predict clinical efficiency of anti-cancer drugs for individual patients by transferring features obtained from the expression-based data from cell lines. The method was validated on three datasets for cancer-like diseases (chronic myeloid leukemia, as well as lung adenocarcinoma and renal carcinoma) treated with targeted drugs - kinase inhibitors, such as imatinib or sorafenib.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it