A Deep Learning Framework for Prediction of Clinical Drug Response of Cancer Patients and Identification of Drug Sensitivity Biomarkers using Preclinical Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Prediction of the response of cancer patients to different treatments and identification of biomarkers of drug sensitivity are two major goals of individualized medicine. In this study, we developed a deep learning framework called TINDL, completely trained on preclinical cancer cell lines, to predict the response of cancer patients to different treatments. TINDL utilizes a tissue-informed normalization to account for the tissue and cancer type of the tumours and to reduce the statistical discrepancies between cell lines and patient tumours. In addition, this model identifies a small set of genes whose mRNA expression are predictive of drug response in the trained model, enabling identification of biomarkers of drug sensitivity. Results Using data from two large databases of cancer cell lines and cancer tumours, we showed that this model can distinguish between sensitive and resistant tumours for 10 (out of 14) drugs, outperforming various other machine learning models. In addition, our siRNA knockdown experiments on 10 genes identified by this model for one of the drugs (tamoxifen) confirmed that all of these genes significantly influence the drug sensitivity of the MCF7 cell line to this drug. In addition, genes implicated for multiple drugs pointed to shared mechanism of action among drugs and suggested several important signaling pathways. Conclusions In summary, this study provides a powerful deep learning framework for prediction of drug response and for identification of biomarkers of drug sensitivity in 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".