Graph-based analysis of mass spectrometry data for tissue characterization with application in basal cell carcinoma surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Basal Cell Carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer in the world. Surgery is the standard treatment and margin assessment is used to evaluate the outcome. The presence of cancerous cells at the edge of resected tissue i.e., positive margin, can negatively impact patient outcomes and increase the probability of cancer recurrence. Novel mass spectrometry technologies paired with machine learning can provide surgeons with real-time feedback about margins to eliminate the need for resurgery. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the performance of cancer detection using Graph Convolutional Networks (GCN) on mass spectrometry data from resected BCC samples. METHODS: The dataset used in this study is a subset of an ongoing clinical data acquired by our group and annotated with the help of a trained pathologist. There is a total number of 190 spectra in this dataset, including 127 normal and 63 BCC samples. We propose single-layer and multi-layer conversion methods to represent each mass spectrum as a structured graph. The graph classifier is developed based on the deep GCN structure to distinguish between cancer and normal spectra. The results are compared with the state of the art in mass spectra analysis. RESULTS: The classification performance of GCN with multi-layer representation without any data augmentation is comparable to the previous studies that have used augmentation. CONCLUSION: The results indicate the capability of the proposed graph-based analysis of mass spectrometry data for tissue characterization or real-time margin assessment during cancer surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".