MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392402197 · doi:10.1186/s12967-024-05018-9

Conditional generative adversarial network driven radiomic prediction of mutation status based on magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer

2024· article· en· W4392402197 on OpenAlexafffund
Zi Huai Huang, Lianghong Chen, Yan Sun, Qian Liu, Pingzhao Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Translational Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteChildren’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of WinnipegWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsBreast Cancer Society of Canada
KeywordsRadiogenomicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDeep learningReceiver operating characteristicComputational biologyMagnetic resonance imagingBreast cancerPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningBioinformaticsMedicineGeneticsBiologyCancerRadiomicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breast Cancer (BC) is a highly heterogeneous and complex disease. Personalized treatment options require the integration of multi-omic data and consideration of phenotypic variability. Radiogenomics aims to merge medical images with genomic measurements but encounter challenges due to unpaired data consisting of imaging, genomic, or clinical outcome data. In this study, we propose the utilization of a well-trained conditional generative adversarial network (cGAN) to address the unpaired data issue in radiogenomic analysis of BC. The generated images will then be used to predict the mutations status of key driver genes and BC subtypes. METHODS: We integrated the paired MRI and multi-omic (mRNA gene expression, DNA methylation, and copy number variation) profiles of 61 BC patients from The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). To facilitate this integration, we employed a Bayesian Tensor Factorization approach to factorize the multi-omic data into 17 latent features. Subsequently, a cGAN model was trained based on the matched side-view patient MRIs and their corresponding latent features to predict MRIs for BC patients who lack MRIs. Model performance was evaluated by calculating the distance between real and generated images using the Fréchet Inception Distance (FID) metric. BC subtype and mutation status of driver genes were obtained from the cBioPortal platform, where 3 genes were selected based on the number of mutated patients. A convolutional neural network (CNN) was constructed and trained using the generated MRIs for mutation status prediction. Receiver operating characteristic area under curve (ROC-AUC) and precision-recall area under curve (PR-AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of the CNN models for mutation status prediction. Precision, recall and F1 score were used to evaluate the performance of the CNN model in subtype classification. RESULTS: The FID of the images from the well-trained cGAN model based on the test set is 1.31. The CNN for TP53, PIK3CA, and CDH1 mutation prediction yielded ROC-AUC values 0.9508, 0.7515, and 0.8136 and PR-AUC are 0.9009, 0.7184, and 0.5007, respectively for the three genes. Multi-class subtype prediction achieved precision, recall and F1 scores of 0.8444, 0.8435 and 0.8336 respectively. The source code and related data implemented the algorithms can be found in the project GitHub at https://github.com/mattthuang/BC_RadiogenomicGAN . CONCLUSION: Our study establishes cGAN as a viable tool for generating synthetic BC MRIs for mutation status prediction and subtype classification to better characterize the heterogeneity of BC in patients. The synthetic images also have the potential to significantly augment existing MRI data and circumvent issues surrounding data sharing and patient privacy for future BC machine learning studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Translational MedicineSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207