Combining Molecular Subtypes with Multivariable Clinical Models Has the Potential to Improve Prediction of Treatment Outcomes in Prostate Cancer at Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical management of prostate cancer is challenging because of its highly variable natural history and so there is a need for improved predictors of outcome in non-metastatic men at the time of diagnosis. In this study we calculated the model score from the leading clinical multivariable model, PREDICT prostate, and the poor prognosis DESNT molecular subtype, in a combined expression and clinical dataset that were taken from malignant tissue at prostatectomy (n = 359). Both PREDICT score (p < 0.0001, IQR HR = 1.59) and DESNT score (p < 0.0001, IQR HR = 2.08) were significant predictors for time to biochemical recurrence. A joint model combining the continuous PREDICT and DESNT score (p < 0.0001, IQR HR = 1.53 and 1.79, respectively) produced a significantly improved predictor than either model alone (p < 0.001). An increased probability of mortality after diagnosis, as estimated by PREDICT, was characterised by upregulation of cell-cycle related pathways and the downregulation of metabolism and cholesterol biosynthesis. The DESNT molecular subtype has distinct biological characteristics to those associated with the PREDICT model. We conclude that the inclusion of biological information alongside current clinical prognostic tools has the potential to improve the ability to choose the optimal treatment pathway for a patient.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".