Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19356222›Full record

ArticleGenome medicine2009

A kernel-based integration of genome-wide data for clinical decision support.

Anneleen Daemen, Olivier Gevaert, Fabian Ojeda, Annelies Debucquoy, Johan Ak Suykens, Christine Sempoux, Jean-Pascal Machiels, Karin Haustermans, Bart De Moor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The organizing principle of GABABasic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Data integration of structured and unstructured sources for assigning clinical codes to patient stays.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Anneleen DaemenDepartment of Electrical Engineering (ESAT-SCD), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg, 3001 Leuven, Belgium. anneleen.daemen@esat.kuleuven.be.
Olivier Gevaert
Fabian Ojeda
Annelies Debucquoy
Johan Ak Suykens
Christine Sempoux
Jean-Pascal Machiels
Karin Haustermans
Bart De Moor

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough microarray technology allows the investigation of the transcriptomic make-up of a tumor in one experiment, the transcriptome does not completely reflect the underlying biology due to alternative splicing, post-translational modifications, as well as the influence of pathological conditions (for example, cancer) on transcription and translation. This increases the importance of fusing more than one source of genome-wide data, such as the genome, transcriptome, proteome, and epigenome. The current increase in the amount of available omics data emphasizes the need for a methodological integration framework.

methodsWe propose a kernel-based approach for clinical decision support in which many genome-wide data sources are combined. Integration occurs within the patient domain at the level of kernel matrices before building the classifier. As supervised classification algorithm, a weighted least squares support vector machine is used. We apply this framework to two cancer cases, namely, a rectal cancer data set containing microarray and proteomics data and a prostate cancer data set containing microarray and genomics data. For both cases, multiple outcomes are predicted.

resultsFor the rectal cancer outcomes, the highest leave-one-out (LOO) areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were obtained when combining microarray and proteomics data gathered during therapy and ranged from 0.927 to 0.987. For prostate cancer, all four outcomes had a better LOO AUC when combining microarray and genomics data, ranging from 0.786 for recurrence to 0.987 for metastasis.

conclusionsFor both cancer sites the prediction of all outcomes improved when more than one genome-wide data set was considered. This suggests that integrating multiple genome-wide data sources increases the predictive performance of clinical decision support models. This emphasizes the need for comprehensive multi-modal data. We acknowledge that, in a first phase, this will substantially increase costs; however, this is a necessary investment to ultimately obtain cost-efficient models usable in patient tailored therapy.

Identifiers

PMID19356222
PMCPMC2684660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.