Tumour-educated platelets for breast cancer detection: biological and technical insights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that blood platelets contain tumour-specific mRNA profiles tumour-educated platelets (TEPs). Here, we aim to train a TEP-based breast cancer detection classifier. METHODS: Platelet mRNA was sequenced from 266 women with stage I-IV breast cancer and 212 female controls from 6 hospitals. A particle swarm optimised support vector machine (PSO-SVM) and an elastic net-based classifier (EN) were trained on 71% of the study population. Classifier performance was evaluated in the remainder (29%) of the population, followed by validation in an independent set (37 cases and 36 controls). Potential confounding was assessed in post hoc analyses. RESULTS: Both classifiers reached an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85 upon internal validation. Reproducibility in the independent validation set was poor with an AUC of 0.55 and 0.54 for the PSO-SVM and EN classifier, respectively. Post hoc analyses indicated that 19% of the variance in gene expression was associated with hospital. Genes related to platelet activity were differentially expressed between hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: We could not validate two TEP-based breast cancer classifiers in an independent validation cohort. The TEP protocol is sensitive to within-protocol variation and revision might be necessary before TEPs can be reconsidered for breast cancer detection.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".