<scp>MAGIC‐DR</scp>: An interpretable machine‐learning guided approach for acute myeloid leukemia measurable residual disease analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiparameter flow cytometry is widely used for acute myeloid leukemia minimal residual disease testing (AML MRD) but is time consuming and demands substantial expertise. Machine learning offers potential advancements in accuracy and efficiency, but has yet to be widely adopted for this application. To explore this, we trained single cell XGBoost classifiers from 98 diagnostic AML cell populations and 30 MRD negative samples. Performance was assessed by cross-validation. Predictions were integrated with UMAP as a heatmap parameter for an augmented/interactive AML MRD analysis framework, which was benchmarked against traditional MRD analysis for 25 test cases. The results showed that XGBoost achieved a median AUC of 0.97, effectively distinguishing diverse AML cell populations from normal cells. When integrated with UMAP, the classifiers highlighted MRD populations against the background of normal events. Our pipeline, MAGIC-DR, incorporated classifier predictions and UMAP into flow cytometry standard (FCS) files. This enabled a human-in-the-loop machine learning guided MRD workflow. Validation against conventional analysis for 25 MRD samples showed 100% concordance in myeloid blast detection, with MAGIC-DR also identifying several immature monocytic populations not readily found by conventional analysis. In conclusion, Integrating a supervised classifier with unsupervised dimension reduction offers a robust method for AML MRD analysis that can be seamlessly integrated into conventional workflows. Our approach can support and augment human analysis by highlighting abnormal populations that can be gated on for quantification and further assessment. This has the potential to speed up MRD analysis, and potentially improve detection sensitivity for certain AML immunophenotypes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.008 |
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".