MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405004943 · doi:10.3390/ijms252313029

Metabolomics-Based Machine Learning Models Accurately Predict Breast Cancer Estrogen Receptor Status

2024· article· en· W4405004943 on OpenAlexaff
Kamala K. Arumalla, Jean-François Haince, Rashid Ahmed Bux, Guoyu Huang, Paramjit S. Tappia, Bram Ramjiawan, W. Randolph Ford, Maria Vaida

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerEstrogen receptorMetabolomicsMachine learningComputational biologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBioinformaticsCancerMedicineInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is a global concern as a leading cause of death for women. Early and precise diagnosis can be vital in handling the disease efficiently. Breast cancer subtyping based on estrogen receptor (ER) status is crucial for determining prognosis and treatment. This study uses metabolomics data from plasma samples to detect metabolite biomarkers that could distinguish ER-positive from ER-negative breast cancers in a non-invasive manner. The dataset includes demographic information, ER status, and metabolite levels from 188 breast cancer patients and 73 healthy controls. Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) with a Random Forest (RF) classifier identified an optimal subset of 30 features-29 biomarkers and age-that achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC). To address the class imbalance, Gaussian noise-based augmentation and Adaptive Synthetic Oversampling (ADASYN) were applied, ensuring balanced representation during training. Four machine learning (ML) algorithms-Random Forest, Support Vector Classifier (SVC), XGBoost, and Logistic Regression (LR)-were evaluated using grid search. The Random Forest classifier emerged as the top performer, achieving an AUC of 0.95 and an accuracy of 93%. These results suggest that ML has great promise for identifying specific metabolites linked to ER expression, paving the development of a novel analytical tool that can minimize current challenges in identifying ER status, and improve the precision of breast cancer subtyping.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences→Same topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies→French-language works237,207→