Survival analysis of pathway activity as a prognostic determinant in breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High throughput biology enables the measurements of relative concentrations of thousands of biomolecules from e.g. tissue samples. The process leaves the investigator with the problem of how to best interpret the potentially large number of differences between samples. Many activities in a cell depend on ordered reactions involving multiple biomolecules, often referred to as pathways. It hence makes sense to study differences between samples in terms of altered pathway activity, using so-called pathway analysis. Traditional pathway analysis gives significance to differences in the pathway components' concentrations between sample groups, however, less frequently used methods for estimating individual samples' pathway activities have been suggested. Here we demonstrate that such a method can be used for pathway-based survival analysis. Specifically, we investigate the pathway activities' association with patients' survival time based on the transcription profiles of the METABRIC dataset. Our implementation shows that pathway activities are better prognostic markers for survival time in METABRIC than the individual transcripts. We also demonstrate that we can regress out the effect of individual pathways on other pathways, which allows us to estimate the other pathways' residual pathway activity on survival. Furthermore, we illustrate how one can visualize the often interdependent measures over hierarchical pathway databases using sunburst plots.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".