Gene expression based inference of drug resistance in cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inter and intra-tumoral heterogeneity are major stumbling blocks in the treatment of cancer and are responsible for imparting differential drug responses in cancer patients. Recently, the availability of large-scale drug screening datasets has provided an opportunity for predicting appropriate patient-tailored therapies by employing machine learning approaches. In this study, we report a predictive modeling approach to infer treatment response in cancers using gene expression data. In particular, we demonstrate the benefits of considering integrated chemogenomics approach, utilizing the molecular drug descriptors and pathway activity information as opposed to gene expression levels. We performed extensive validation of our approach on tissue-derived single-cell and bulk expression data. Further, we constructed several prostate cancer cell lines and xenografts, exposed to differential treatment conditions to assess the predictability of the outcomes. Our approach was further assessed on pan-cancer RNA-sequencing data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) archives, as well as an independent clinical trial study describing the treatment journey of three melanoma patients. To summarise, we benchmarked the proposed approach on cancer RNA-seq data, obtained from cell lines, xenografts, as well as humans. We concluded that pathway-activity patterns in cancer cells are reasonably indicative of drug resistance, and therefore can be leveraged in personalized treatment recommendations.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".