Learning Individual Survival Models from PanCancer Whole Transcriptome Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Personalized medicine attempts to predict survival time for each patient, based on their individual tumor molecular profile. We investigate whether our survival learner in combination with a dimension reduction method can produce useful survival estimates for a variety of patients with cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This article provides a method that learns a model for predicting the survival time for individual patients with cancer from the PanCancer Atlas: given the (16,335 dimensional) gene expression profiles from 10,173 patients, each having one of 33 cancers, this method uses unsupervised nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) to reexpress the gene expression data for each patient in terms of 100 learned NMF factors. It then feeds these 100 factors into the Multi-Task Logistic Regression (MTLR) learner to produce cancer-specific models for each of 20 cancers (with >50 uncensored instances); this produces "individual survival distributions" (ISD), which provide survival probabilities at each future time for each individual patient, which provides a patient's risk score and estimated survival time. RESULTS: Our NMF-MTLR concordance indices outperformed the VAECox benchmark by 14.9% overall. We achieved optimal survival prediction using pan-cancer NMF in combination with cancer-specific MTLR models. We provide biological interpretation of the NMF model and clinical implications of ISDs for prognosis and therapeutic response prediction. CONCLUSIONS: NMF-MTLR provides many benefits over other models: superior model discrimination, superior calibration, meaningful survival time estimates, and accurate probabilistic estimates of survival over time for each individual patient. We advocate for the adoption of these cancer survival models in clinical and research settings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".