ReProMSig: an integrative platform for development and application of reproducible multivariable models for cancer prognosis supporting guideline-based transparent reporting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adequate reporting is essential for evaluating the performance and clinical utility of a prognostic prediction model. Previous studies indicated a prevalence of incomplete or suboptimal reporting in translational and clinical studies involving development of multivariable prediction models for prognosis, which limited the potential applications of these models. While reporting templates introduced by the established guidelines provide an invaluable framework for reporting prognostic studies uniformly, there is a widespread lack of qualified adherence, which may be due to miscellaneous challenges in manual reporting of extensive model details, especially in the era of precision medicine. Here, we present ReProMSig (Reproducible Prognosis Molecular Signature), a web-based integrative platform providing the analysis framework for development, validation and application of a multivariable prediction model for cancer prognosis, using clinicopathological features and/or molecular profiles. ReProMSig platform supports transparent reporting by presenting both methodology details and analysis results in a strictly structured reporting file, following the guideline checklist with minimal manual input needed. The generated reporting file can be published together with a developed prediction model, to allow thorough interrogation and external validation, as well as online application for prospective cases. We demonstrated the utilities of ReProMSig by development of prognostic molecular signatures for stage II and III colorectal cancer respectively, in comparison with a published signature reproduced by ReProMSig. Together, ReProMSig provides an integrated framework for development, evaluation and application of prognostic/predictive biomarkers for cancer in a more transparent and reproducible way, which would be a useful resource for health care professionals and biomedical researchers.
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 | 0.051 | 0.139 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.030 |
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".