ArticleMethods of information in medicine2012
Identification of breast cancer prognosis markers using integrative sparse boosting.
Article in Methods of information in medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Evaluation of WBP2NL-Related Genes Expression in Breast Cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2015Article
- From bed to bench: bridging from informatics practice to theory: an exploratory analysis.Applied clinical informatics · 2014Article
- Gene network-based cancer prognosis analysis with sparse boosting.Genetics research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIn breast cancer research, it is important to identify genomic markers associated with prognosis. Multiple microarray gene expression profiling studies have been conducted, searching for prognosis markers. Genomic markers identified from the analysis of single datasets often suffer a lack of reproducibility because of small sample sizes. Integrative analysis of data from multiple independent studies has a larger sample size and may provide a cost-effective solution.
methodsWe collect four breast cancer prognosis studies with gene expression measurements. An accelerated failure time (AFT) model with an unknown error distribution is adopted to describe survival. An integrative sparse boosting approach is employed for marker selection. The proposed model and boosting approach can effectively accommodate heterogeneity across multiple studies and identify genes with consistent effects.
resultsSimulation study shows that the proposed approach outperforms alternatives including meta-analysis and intensity approaches by identifying the majority or all of the true positives, while having a low false positive rate. In the analysis of breast cancer data, 44 genes are identified as associated with prognosis. Many of the identified genes have been previously suggested as associated with tumorigenesis and cancer prognosis. The identified genes and corresponding predicted risk scores differ from those using alternative approaches. Monte Carlo-based prediction evaluation suggests that the proposed approach has the best prediction performance.
conclusionsIntegrative analysis may provide an effective way of identifying breast cancer prognosis markers. Markers identified using the integrative sparse boosting analysis have sound biological implications and satisfactory prediction performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.