MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3199429500 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.13.460002

Stable breast cancer prognosis

2021· preprint· en· W3199429500 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xiaomei Li, Lin Liu, Jiuyong Li, Thuc Duy Le

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Cancer AgencyCancer Research UK
KeywordsBreast cancerInferenceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCancerMachine learningData miningOncologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Predicting breast cancer prognosis helps improve the treatment and management of the disease. In the last decades, many prediction models have been developed for breast cancer prognosis based on transcriptomic data. A common assumption made by these models is that the test and training data follow the same distribution. However, in practice, due to the heterogeneity of breast cancer and the different environments (e.g. hospitals) where data are collected, the distribution of the test data may shift from that of the training data. For example, new patients likely have different breast cancer stage distribution from those in the training dataset. Thus these existing methods may not provide stable prediction performance for breast cancer prognosis in situations with the shift of data distribution. In this paper, we present a novel stable prediction method for reliable breast cancer prognosis under data distribution shift. Our model, known as Deep Global Balancing Cox regression (DGBCox), is based on the causal inference theory. In DGBCox, firstly high-dimensional gene expression data is transferred to latent network-based representations by a deep auto-encoder neural network. Then after balancing the latent representations using a proposed causality-based approach, causal latent features are selected for breast cancer prognosis. Causal features have persistent relationships with survival outcomes even under distribution shift across different environments according to the causal inference theory. Therefore, the proposed DGBCox method is robust and stable for breast cancer prognosis. We apply DGBCox to 12 test datasets from different breast cancer studies. The results show that DGBCox outperforms benchmark methods in terms of both prediction accuracy and stability. We also propose a permutation importance algorithm to rank the genes in the DGBCox model. The top 50 ranked genes suggest that the cell cycle and the organelle organisation could be the most relevant biological processes for stable breast cancer prognosis. Author summary Various prediction models have been proposed for breast cancer prognosis. The prediction models usually train on a dataset and predict the survival outcomes of patients in new test datasets. The majority of these models share a common assumption that the test and training data follow the same distribution. However, as breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, the assumption may be violated in practice. In this study, we propose a novel method for reliable breast cancer prognosis when the test data distribution shifts from that of the training data. The proposed model has been trained on one dataset and applied to twelve test datasets from different breast cancer studies. In comparison with the benchmark methods in breast cancer prognosis, our model shows better prediction accuracy and stability. The top 50 important genes in our model provide clues to the relationship between several biological mechanisms and clinical outcomes of breast cancer. Our proposed method in breast cancer can potentially be adapted to apply to other cancer types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAI in cancer detection→French-language works237,207→