MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417158195 · doi:10.3390/app152412959

Towards Digital Twins in Prostate Cancer: A Mixture-of-Experts Framework for Multitask Prognostics in Hospital Admissions

2025· article· en· W4417158195 on OpenAlexaff
Annette John, Reda Alhajj, Jon Rokne

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrognosticsAcute kidney injuryReceiver operating characteristicTriageProstate cancerEmergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early risk prediction is essential for hospitalized prostate cancer (PCa) patients, who face acute events, such as mortality, ICU transfer, AKI (acute kidney injury), ED30 (unplanned 30-day Emergency Department revisit), and prolonged LOS (length of stay). We developed an MMoE (Multitask Mixture-of-Experts) model that jointly predicts these outcomes from the features of the multimodal EHR (Electronic Health Records) in MIMIC-IV (3956 admissions; 2497 patients). A configuration with six experts delivered consistent gains over strong single-task baselines. On the held-out test set, the MMoE improved rare-event detection (mortality AUPRC (Area Under the Precision-Recall Curve) of 0.163 vs. 0.091, +79%) and modestly boosted ED30 discrimination (AUROC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve) ≈0.66 with leakage-safe ClinicalBERT fusion) while maintaining competitive ICU and AKI performance. Expert-routing diagnostics (top-1 shares, entropy, and task-dead counts) revealed clinically coherent specialization (e.g., renal signals for AKI), supporting interpretability. An efficiency log showed that the model is compact and deployable (∼85 k parameters, 0.34 MB; 0.027 s/sample); it replaced five single-task predictors with a single forward pass. Overall, the MMoE offered a practical balance of accuracy, calibrated probabilities, and readable routing for the prognostic layer of digital-twin pipelines in oncology.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueApplied SciencesSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207