Novel machine learning model for predicting cancer drugs’ susceptibilities and discovering novel treatments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Timely treatment is crucial for cancer patients, so it's important to administer the appropriate treatment as soon as possible. Because individuals can respond differently to a given drug due to their unique genomic profiles, we aim to use their genomic information to predict how various drugs will affect them and determine the best course of treatment. METHODS: We present Kernelized Residual Stacking (KRS), a new multi-task learning approach, and use it to predict the responses to anti-cancer drugs based on genomic data. We demonstrate the superior predictive performance of KRS, outperforming popular competitors, by utilizing the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) study and the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) study. Downstream analysis of feature genes selected by KRS is conducted to discover novel therapies. RESULTS: We used two genomic studies to show that KRS outperforms a few popular competitors in predicting drugs' susceptibilities. Through downstream analysis of feature genes selected by KRS, we found that the PI3K-Akt pathway could alter drugs' susceptibilities, and its expression correlated positively with the hub gene ERBB2. We discovered eight novel small molecules based on these feature genes, which could be developed into novel combination therapies with anti-cancer drugs. CONCLUSIONS: KRS outperforms competitors in prediction performance and selects feature genes highly correlated with drugs' susceptibilities. Novel biological results are found by investigating KRS's feature genes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it