Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29312619›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

Systematic assessment of cervical cancer initiation and progression uncovers genetic panels for deep learning-based early diagnosis and proposes novel diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers.

Nguyen Phuoc Long, Kyung Hee Jung, Sang Jun Yoon, Nguyen Hoang Anh, Tran Diem Nghi, Yun Pyo Kang, Hong Hua Yan, Jung Eun Min, Soon-Sun Hong, Sung Won Kwon

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nguyen Phuoc LongCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Kyung Hee JungDepartment of Drug Development, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon 22212, Korea.
Sang Jun YoonCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Nguyen Hoang AnhSchool of Medicine, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh 70000, Vietnam.
Tran Diem NghiSchool of Medicine, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh 70000, Vietnam.
Yun Pyo KangCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Hong Hua YanDepartment of Drug Development, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon 22212, Korea.
Jung Eun MinCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Soon-Sun HongDepartment of Drug Development, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon 22212, Korea.
Sung Won KwonCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Inha University · KRSeoul National University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although many outstanding achievements in the management of cervical cancer (CxCa) have obtained, it still imposes a major burden which has prompted scientists to discover and validate new CxCa biomarkers to improve the diagnostic and prognostic assessment of CxCa. In this study, eight different gene expression data sets containing 202 cancer, 115 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), and 105 normal samples were utilized for an integrative systems biology assessment in a multi-stage carcinogenesis manner. Deep learning-based diagnostic models were established based on the genetic panels of intrinsic genes of cervical carcinogenesis as well as on the unbiased variable selection approach. Survival analysis was also conducted to explore the potential biomarker candidates for prognostic assessment. Our results showed that cell cycle, RNA transport, mRNA surveillance, and one carbon pool by folate were the key regulatory mechanisms involved in the initiation, progression, and metastasis of CxCa. Various genetic panels combined with machine learning algorithms successfully differentiated CxCa from CIN and normalcy in cross-study normalized data sets. In particular, the 168-gene deep learning model for the differentiation of cancer from normalcy achieved an externally validated accuracy of 97.96% (99.01% sensitivity and 95.65% specificity). Survival analysis revealed that ZNF281 and EPHB6 were the two most promising prognostic genetic markers for CxCa among others. Our findings open new opportunities to enhance current understanding of the characteristics of CxCa pathobiology. In addition, the combination of transcriptomics-based signatures and deep learning classification may become an important approach to improve CxCa diagnosis and management in clinical practice.

Indexed as

cervical cancerdeep learningmeta-analysissurvival analysistranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID29312619
PMCPMC5752532
OpenAlexW2769410655

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.