Individual Survival Distributions Generated by Multi-Task Logistic Regression Yield a New Perspective on Molecular and Clinical Prognostic Factors in Gastric Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in our understanding of gastric cancer biology have prompted a shift towards more personalized therapy. However, results are based on population-based survival analyses, which evaluate the average survival effects of entire treatment groups or single prognostic variables. This study uses a personalized survival modelling approach called individual survival distributions (ISDs) with the multi-task logistic regression (MTLR) model to provide novel insight into personalized survival in gastric adenocarcinoma. We performed a pooled analysis using 1043 patients from a previously characterized database annotated with molecular subtypes from the Cancer Genome Atlas, Asian Cancer Research Group, and tumour microenvironment (TME) score. The MTLR model achieved a 5-fold cross-validated concordance index of 72.1 ± 3.3%. This model found that the TME score and chemotherapy had similar survival effects over the entire study time. The TME score provided the greatest survival benefit beyond a 5-year follow-up. Stage III and Stage IV disease contributed the greatest negative effect on survival. The MTLR model weights were significantly correlated with the Cox model coefficients (Pearson coefficient = 0.86, p < 0.0001). We illustrate how ISDs can accurately predict the survival time for each patient, which is especially relevant in cases of molecular subtype heterogeneity. This study provides evidence that the TME score is principally associated with long-term survival in gastric adenocarcinoma. Additional external validation and investigation into the clinical utility of this ISD model in gastric cancer is an area of future research.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".