MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract B008: <i>Machine-learning modelling of lung cancer metastasis to the brain using alterations in DNA methylation</i>

2025· article· en· W4407052516 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Zuccato, Yasin Mamatjan, Farshad Nassiri, Andrew Ajisebutu, Jeffrey Liu, Ammara Muazzam, Olivia Singh, Wen Zhang, Mathew Voisin, Suganth Suppiah, Olli Saarela, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Thomas Kislinger, Kenneth Aldape, Michael F. Moran, Vikas Patil, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity Health NetworkThompson Rivers UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA methylationCancerLung cancerMethylationMetastasisBrain metastasisCancer researchMedicineComputational biologyDNAOncologyBiologyInternal medicineGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Brain metastases (BM) are common and arise in 30% of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients, the most common cancer type to metastasize to the brain. Patients with LUAD that develop BM experience significantly poorer outcomes, with a 10-16 month median overall survival. Unfortunately, current clinical practice for BM prediction is limited and so BM are typically detected after they develop and grow to cause neurological symptoms. Once BM are detected, currently neurosurgical tumor biopsies are performed to enable BM diagnosis via neuropathological evaluation. The objective of this study was to develop DNA methylation-based models that 1) predict which LUAD patients are likely to develop BM and 2) detect BM through a liquid biopsy approach to allow for potential BM prevention, early treatment, and non-invasive diagnosis. Methods: A cohort of 346 LUAD and BM patients was assembled with a combined total of 402 tumor tissue and plasma samples. Machine learning models were built, using discovery datasets (60% and 80%, respectively), with DNA methylation alterations that can stratify the risk of BM development in tissue and can detect BM in plasma. Models were evaluated in independent validation datasets and further validated in additional external data. A predictive nomogram was developed that incorporates the results of the BM prediction model with predictive clinical factors to provide composite patient-specific scores reflecting BM risk. Results: The methylation-based model using LUAD tissue to predict BM was shown to reliably and accurately stratify BM risk in a univariable Cox model using validation set data (hazard ratio [HR]=5.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.85–17.2, p=0.0023). The utility of this model was independent of the predictive value of clinical factors in a multivariable Cox model using validation set data (HR=8.92, 95% CI: 1.97–40.5, p=0.0046). The BM predictive model had a 5-year area under receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.81 which was significantly higher than that of a similarly built model using clinical factors (AUROC=0.65), reflecting its utility over current clinical practice. The predictive nomogram using clinical and methylation-based factors combinatorially had a 5-year BM prediction accuracy of 0.82 and a greater HR in a univariable Cox model (HR=17.2, 95% CI: 4.13–71.3, p<0.0001) in validation set data, demonstrating that it is an optimized patient-specific prediction tool. The methylation-based model for detection of BM in plasma showed accurate classification of BM from gliomas and lymphomas (AUROC=0.80), as typical clinical differential diagnoses, in validation set data. The models were validated further in additional external data. Conclusions: DNA methylation-based modeling of brain metastasis can accurately predict LUAD patients at risk for BM development and can non-invasively detect BM that develop. Future treatment approaches may tailor initial LUAD treatment and ongoing cancer surveillance to a patient’s BM risk, allowing for the potential to prevent and treat BM early. Citation Format: Jeffrey A Zuccato, Yasin Mamatjan, Farshad Nassiri, Andrew Ajisebutu, Jeffrey Liu, Ammara Muazzam, Olivia Singh, Wen Zhang, Mathew Voisin, Suganth Suppiah, Olli Saarela, Ming Tsao, Thomas Kislinger, Kenneth Aldape, Michael Moran, Vikas Patil, Gelareh Zadeh. Machine-learning modelling of lung cancer metastasis to the brain using alterations in DNA methylation [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: DNA Methylation, Clonal Hematopoiesis, and Cancer; 2025 Feb 1-4; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(3 Suppl):Abstract nr B008.

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)0.003
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging→French-language works237,207→