Precision in prediction: tailoring machine learning models for breast cancer missense variants pathogenicity prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate classification of genetic variants is critical for precision medicine, particularly hereditary diseases such as breast cancer. However, widely used tools like MutPred and Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion (CADD) offer genome-wide pathogenicity predictions that often overlook disease-specific variant behavior, limiting their clinical utility. This study addresses that gap by training and benchmarking nine machine learning (ML) models-including ensemble and baseline classifiers-on a breast cancer gene-specific dataset rich in conservation scores, functional annotations, and allele frequency features. Among all models, the Extra Trees model achieved the highest performance, with an accuracy of 0.999 and a 95% confidence interval of (0.998-1.000). recursive feature elimination identified the most informative genomic features, enhancing model efficiency. To ensure clinical transparency, we applied interpretability techniques including Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations and permutation feature importance, which highlighted the key drivers of each prediction. The calibration curve further confirmed the reliability of predicted probabilities, supporting their potential use in clinical decision-making. On an independent ClinGen dataset, Extra Trees achieved 99.1% accuracy and outperformed widely used predictors confirming its robustness and clinical applicability. This is the first comprehensive benchmarking study to apply ML models specifically to breast cancer-related missense variants using disease-gene-specific training data and integrated interpretability. Our results show that disease-specific ML approaches outperform general predictors, offering improved reliability, transparency, and relevance to clinical genomics. By bridging the gap between broad genome-wide tools and tailored clinical prediction, this study lays the foundation for implementing ML-driven pathogenicity prediction in breast cancer diagnostics and precision medicine, with potential expansion to other disease contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".