Pathway-Based Drug Response Prediction Using Similarity Identification in Gene Expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lapatinib and Trastuzumab (Herceptin) are targeted therapies designed for patients with HER2+ breast tumors. Although these therapies improved survival rates of patients with this tumor type, not all the patients harboring HER2 amplification respond to these drugs. The NeoALTTO clinical trial was designed to test whether a higher response rate can be achieved by combining Lapatinib and Trastuzumab. Although combination therapy showed almost double the response rate compared to the monotherapies, 40% of the patients did not respond to the treatment. In this study, we sought to identify biomarkers of HER2+ breast cancer patients’ response to drugs relying on gene expression profiles of tumors. We show that univariate gene expression-based biomarkers are significant but weak predictors of drug response. We further show that pathway activities, estimated from gene expression patterns quantified using the recent transcriptional similarity coefficient (TSC) between the tumor samples, yield high predictive value for therapy response (concordance index >0.8, p<0.05). Moreover, machine learning models, built using multiple algorithms including: logistic regression, naive Bayes, random forest, k-nearest neighbour and support vector machine, for predicting drug response in NeoALTTO clinical trial resulted in lower performance compared to our pathway based approach. Our results indicate that transcriptional similarity of biological pathways can be used to predict Lapatinib and Trastuzumab response in HER2+ breast cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".