Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29110491›Full record

ArticleJournal of proteome research2018

Deep Learning Accurately Predicts Estrogen Receptor Status in Breast Cancer Metabolomics Data.

Fadhl M Alakwaa, Kumardeep Chaudhary, Lana X Garmire

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of proteome research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 127 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
127citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

127 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. NMR in biomedicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Fadhl M AlakwaaEpidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center , Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5349-7960
Kumardeep ChaudharyEpidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center , Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States.
Lana X GarmireEpidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center , Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States.

Funding

Transgenic Mouse, ICSI and IVF CoreP20GM103457 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI URSCHITZ, JOHANN · 2012 to 2018
$12.9M
An Integrative Omics Approach to Identify Biomarkers Related to Preeclampsia and Breast Cancer RisksR01HD084633 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GARMIRE, LANA X · 2016 to 2020
$3.0M
Cancer precision medicine through spatially informative single cell image and transcriptomics data analysisR01LM012373 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GARMIRE, LANA X · 2016 to 2024
$2.4M
An Integrative Bioinformatics Approach to Study Single Cancer Cell HeterogeneityK01ES025434 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GARMIRE, LANA X · 2014 to 2018
$905k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD084633NIEHS NIH HHS K01 ES025434NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103457NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012373
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metabolomics holds the promise as a new technology to diagnose highly heterogeneous diseases. Conventionally, metabolomics data analysis for diagnosis is done using various statistical and machine learning based classification methods. However, it remains unknown if deep neural network, a class of increasingly popular machine learning methods, is suitable to classify metabolomics data. Here we use a cohort of 271 breast cancer tissues, 204 positive estrogen receptor (ER+), and 67 negative estrogen receptor (ER-) to test the accuracies of feed-forward networks, a deep learning (DL) framework, as well as six widely used machine learning models, namely random forest (RF), support vector machines (SVM), recursive partitioning and regression trees (RPART), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), prediction analysis for microarrays (PAM), and generalized boosted models (GBM). DL framework has the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93 in classifying ER+/ER- patients, compared to the other six machine learning algorithms. Furthermore, the biological interpretation of the first hidden layer reveals eight commonly enriched significant metabolomics pathways (adjusted P-value <0.05) that cannot be discovered by other machine learning methods. Among them, protein digestion and absorption and ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters pathways are also confirmed in integrated analysis between metabolomics and gene expression data in these samples. In summary, deep learning method shows advantages for metabolomics based breast cancer ER status classification, with both the highest prediction accuracy (AUC = 0.93) and better revelation of disease biology. We encourage the adoption of feed-forward networks based deep learning method in the metabolomics research community for classification.

Indexed as

Area Under CurveBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMachine LearningMetabolomicsReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, Estrogenbioinformaticsbreast cancerdeep learningestrogen receptormetabolomics

Identifiers

PMID29110491
PMCPMC5759031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.