MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291125094 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.104931

A machine learning model of response to hypomethylating agents in myelodysplastic syndromes

2022· article· en· W4291125094 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Radakovich, David A. Sallman, Rena Buckstein, Andrew M. Brunner, Amy E. DeZern, Sudipto Mukerjee, Rami S. Komrokji, Najla Al‐Ali, Jacob Shreve, Yazan Rouphail, Anne Parmentier, Alexandre Mamedov, Mohammed Siddiqui, Yihong Guan, Teodora Kuzmanovic, Metis Hasipek, Babal K. Jha, Jaroslaw P. Maciejewski, Mikkael A. Sekeres, Aziz Nazha

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCohortMyelodysplastic syndromesMedicineReceiver operating characteristicHypomethylating agentOncologyInternal medicineReliability (semiconductor)BiologyBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypomethylating agents (HMA) prolong survival and improve cytopenias in individuals with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Only 30-40% of patients, however, respond to HMAs, and responses may not occur for more than 6 months after HMA initiation. We developed a model to more rapidly assess HMA response by analyzing early changes in patients' blood counts. Three institutions' data were used to develop a model that assessed patients' response to therapy 90 days after the initiation using serial blood counts. The model was developed with a training cohort of 424 patients from 2 institutions and validated on an independent cohort of 90 patients. The final model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.79 in the train/test group and 0.84 in the validation group. The model provides cohort-wide and individual-level explanations for model predictions, and model certainty can be interrogated to gauge the reliability of a given prediction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207