MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Machine Learning-Driven Prediction of Gleason Score 7 Prostate Cancer Patterns Using Multi-Omics Data

2025· article· en· W4410537121 on OpenAlexaff
Santosh Venkatraman, Ibrahim Al-Hurani, Abedalrhman Alkhateeb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerOmicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProstateCancerMachine learningMedicineBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop a novel advanced Prostate Cancer (PCa) prediction system that utilizes vital omics (DNA Methylation, Gene Expression, and Copy Number Alteration) combined with gene-specific mutation features to stratify 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 Gleason Score samples. Although the 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 samples are variants of grade-7 PCa, the latter is more severe. Histopathological and clinical similarities between these classes often lead oncologists to misdiagnose them. The utilized dataset in this study contains the aforementioned omics data for the most mutating genes (including SPOP, FOXA1, DPYSL2) with Gleason Score as the target, combined with the mutation profiles for 11,690 genes. This study used a Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Network (CTGAN) for handling class imbalance resulting in 145 samples in each class. This dataset was subjected to standard scaling and binary classification using GridSearchCV tuned models such as XGBoost. Mutation features from highly mutating genes were then combined, followed by dimensionality reduction using PCA and a shallow Autoencoder. Binary classification from here on was done with custom deep ANN classifiers in addition to the hyperparameter tuned ML models. An alternate approach to achieve more accuracy was followed where a deep Autoencoder was used to obtain 13 latent features from the dataset. Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) in combination with a Random Forest estimator, were used to obtain the highest-ranking latent features. Isolation Forest and One-Class Support Vector Machine (O-SVM) were then used to effectively stratify the samples. In addition, Kullback Liebler Divergence (KLD), a probability and information loss-based approach was used to study whether all the 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 samples varied significantly. XGBoost achieved the best accuracy (66–71%), outperforming ANN-4 (66%), Random Forest (62%), and a Max-Vote classifier (61%). The system effectively integrates multi-omics data and gene mutations, achieving robust classification despite data limitations.

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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 topicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks→French-language works237,207→