MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414824426 · doi:10.1177/15578666251380233

BCtypeFinder: A Semi-Supervised Model with Domain Adaptation for Breast Cancer Subtyping Using DNA Methylation Profiles

2025· article· en· W4414824426 on OpenAlexaff
Joung Min Choi, Liqing Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSubtypingDNA methylationBreast cancerEpigeneticsRobustness (evolution)Domain adaptationAdaptation (eye)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate breast cancer subtype prediction is critical for precise diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis evaluation. Recent studies highlight the important role of epigenetic modifications in breast tumor, especially the potential of abnormal DNA methylation patterns as markers for distinct subtypes. However, developing a reliable model for subtype prediction based on DNA methylation profiles is challenging due to the scarcity of annotated dataset. This work proposes BCtypeFinder, a breast cancer subtype prediction framework that utilizes a domain adaptation network combined with semi-supervised learning to address batch effects. Our model leverages both labeled and unlabeled DNA methylation data to extract domain-invariant features while aligning subtype distributions across various datasets. BCtypeFinder outperforms current methods, showcasing superior classification performance across multiple test cases. Furthermore, we explored the effects of batch correction in BCtypeFinder, demonstrating its ability to remove batch-specific variations among patients of the same subtype, thus improving the robustness of the classifier. BCtypeFinder is publicly available at https://github.com/joungmin-choi/BCtypeFinder.

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)0.000
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 score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational BiologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207