FUNMarker: Fusion Network-Based Method to Identify Prognostic and Heterogeneous Breast Cancer Biomarkers
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
Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with many clinically distinguishable molecular subtypes each corresponding to a cluster of patients. Identification of prognostic and heterogeneous biomarkers for breast cancer is to detect cluster-specific gene biomarkers which can be used for accurate survival prediction of breast cancer outcomes. In this study, we proposed a FUsion Network-based method (FUNMarker) to identify prognostic and heterogeneous breast cancer biomarkers by considering the heterogeneity of patient samples and biological information from multiple sources. To reduce the affect of heterogeneity of patients, samples were first clustered using the K-means algorithm based on the principal components of gene expression. For each cluster, to comprehensively evaluate the influence of genes on breast cancer, genes were weighted from three aspects: biological function, prognostic ability and correlation with known disease genes. Then they were ranked via a label propagation model on a fusion network that combined physical protein interactions from seven types of networks and thus could reduce the impact of incompleteness of interactome. We compared FUNMarker with three state-of-the-art methods and the results showed that biomarkers identified by FUNMarker were biological interpretable and had stronger discriminative power than the existing methods in differentiating patients with different prognostic outcomes.
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