Deep-Learning Model for Tumor-Type Prediction Using Targeted Clinical Genomic Sequencing Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumor type guides clinical treatment decisions in cancer, but histology-based diagnosis remains challenging. Genomic alterations are highly diagnostic of tumor type, and tumor-type classifiers trained on genomic features have been explored, but the most accurate methods are not clinically feasible, relying on features derived from whole-genome sequencing (WGS), or predicting across limited cancer types. We use genomic features from a data set of 39,787 solid tumors sequenced using a clinically targeted cancer gene panel to develop Genome-Derived-Diagnosis Ensemble (GDD-ENS): a hyperparameter ensemble for classifying tumor type using deep neural networks. GDD-ENS achieves 93% accuracy for high-confidence predictions across 38 cancer types, rivaling the performance of WGS-based methods. GDD-ENS can also guide diagnoses of rare type and cancers of unknown primary and incorporate patient-specific clinical information for improved predictions. Overall, integrating GDD-ENS into prospective clinical sequencing workflows could provide clinically relevant tumor-type predictions to guide treatment decisions in real time. SIGNIFICANCE: We describe a highly accurate tumor-type prediction model, designed specifically for clinical implementation. Our model relies only on widely used cancer gene panel sequencing data, predicts across 38 distinct cancer types, and supports integration of patient-specific nongenomic information for enhanced decision support in challenging diagnostic situations. See related commentary by Garg, p. 906. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 897.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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".