MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415055653 · doi:10.1101/2025.10.10.681581

Deep learning models reading clinical data and liver omics strongly distinguish NASH from steatosis and suggest new genes involved in liver disease severity

2025· preprint· en· W4415055653 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Gambardella Le Novère, Smaïn Fettem, Mathilde Boissel, Lijiao Ning, Violeta Raverdy, Marwa Afnouch, Souhila Amanzougarene, Mehdi Derhourhi, Bénédicte Toussaint, Emmanuel Vaillant, Amna Khamis, Philippe Lefèbvre, Bart Staels, François Pattou, Philippe Froguel, Amélie Bonnefond

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeAgence Nationale de la RechercheEuropean CommissionEuropean Genomic Institute for Diabetes
KeywordsDNA methylationSteatosisFatty liverLiver diseaseDiseaseGeneDeep learningEpigenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background & Aims Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD, previously NAFLD) is a frequent co-morbidity of obesity and diabetes, with prevalence increasing worldwide in all age groups and both sexes. Only early stages of the disease are fully reversible. Recognising liver disease stages and elucidating the molecular underpinning of their progression are thus medically important. We developed a deep learning model to recognise simple steatosis from steatohepatitis combining liver transcriptomics, epigenetics, and clinical data. Methods We used clinical data, liver gene expression and liver DNA methylation gathered from 300 patients with obesity of the ABOS cohort (80 without NAFLD, 137 with simple steatosis, 83 with steatohepatitis). We selected non-redundant clinical variables, gene expressions and CpGs methylation levels most associated with severity using unsupervised approaches. We designed a multi-module, multi-layer perceptron to predict patients’ liver status. We trained five model instances on independent training/test sets and combined the predictions. Results We used a score based on gene expression/DNA methylation and relevant principal component analysis (PCA) loadings to select 200 genes and 260 CpG methylations. Models trained on the three modalities reached an AUC of 0.945 overall on a validation set with accuracies above 81% for simple steatosis and 88% for NASH, outperforming any other machine learning model so far. We retrieved patient clusters previously found using clinical variables in the latent space of our clinical data module, but not in the gene expression and DNA methylation modules. While all three modules are needed to reach the best prediction accuracy in all classes, the gene expression module had the most impact on the decision. Independent models weighted gene expression inputs similarly, shining light on their importance. The most impactful genes were linked to immune responses and extracellular matrix. However, many of those genes were previously unassociated with steatotic liver disease onset or progression. Conclusions A multi-omics deep-learning model can recognise steatohepatitis from simple liver steatosis with an AUC of 0.945 and identify new genes potentially involved in NAFLD progression. Gene expressions profiles predicting disease severity are largely different from those specific of clinical variable clusters. Impact and implications This study suggests that clinical variables are not sufficient to recognise the severity of steatotic liver disease with high accuracy, but model efficiency increases when used together with liver epigenetics and transcriptomics.

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 score0.009

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→