MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229072282 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abj1624

CancerVar: An artificial intelligence–empowered platform for clinical interpretation of somatic mutations in cancer

2022· article· en· W4229072282 on OpenAlexaff
Quan Li, Zilin Ren, Kajia Cao, Marilyn M. Li, Kai Wang, Yunyun Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsSomatic cellComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningGermline mutationComputational biologyBioinformaticsMutationBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several knowledgebases are manually curated to support clinical interpretations of thousands of hotspot somatic mutations in cancer. However, discrepancies or even conflicting interpretations are observed among these databases. Furthermore, many previously undocumented mutations may have clinical or functional impacts on cancer but are not systematically interpreted by existing knowledgebases. To address these challenges, we developed CancerVar to facilitate automated and standardized interpretations for 13 million somatic mutations based on the AMP/ASCO/CAP 2017 guidelines. We further introduced a deep learning framework to predict oncogenicity for these variants using both functional and clinical features. CancerVar achieved satisfactory performance when compared to several independent knowledgebases and, using clinically curated datasets, demonstrated practical utility in classifying somatic variants. In summary, by integrating clinical guidelines with a deep learning framework, CancerVar facilitates clinical interpretation of somatic variants, reduces manual work, improves consistency in variant classification, and promotes implementation of the guidelines.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations62
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207