Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30721923›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2020

Performance of gene expression-based single sample predictors for assessment of clinicopathological subgroups and molecular subtypes in cancers: a case comparison study in non-small cell lung cancer.

Helena Cirenajwis, Martin Lauss, Maria Planck, Johan Vallon-Christersson, Johan Staaf

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Molecular Pathology of Lung Cancer.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2022
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Helena CirenajwisDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden.
Martin LaussDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden.
Maria PlanckDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden.
Johan Vallon-ChristerssonDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden.
Johan StaafDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of multigene classifiers for cancer prognosis, treatment prediction, molecular subtypes or clinicopathological groups has been a cornerstone in transcriptomic analyses of human malignancies for nearly two decades. However, many reported classifiers are critically limited by different preprocessing needs like normalization and data centering. In response, a new breed of classifiers, single sample predictors (SSPs), has emerged. SSPs classify samples in an N-of-1 fashion, relying on, e.g. gene rules comparing expression values within a sample. To date, several methods have been reported, but there is a lack of head-to-head performance comparison for typical cancer classification problems, representing an unmet methodological need in cancer bioinformatics. To resolve this need, we performed an evaluation of two SSPs [k-top-scoring pair classifier (kTSP) and absolute intrinsic molecular subtyping (AIMS)] for two case examples of different magnitude of difficulty in non-small cell lung cancer: gene expression-based classification of (i) tumor histology and (ii) molecular subtype. Through the analysis of ~2000 lung cancer samples for each case example (n = 1918 and n = 2106, respectively), we compared the performance of the methods for different sample compositions, training data set sizes, gene expression platforms and gene rule selections. Three main conclusions are drawn from the comparisons: both methods are platform independent, they select largely overlapping gene rules associated with actual underlying tumor biology and, for large training data sets, they behave interchangeably performance-wise. While SSPs like AIMS and kTSP offer new possibilities to move gene expression signatures/predictors closer to a clinical context, they are still importantly limited by the difficultness of the classification problem at hand.

Indexed as

Gene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCase-Control StudiesGene Expression ProfilingHumansLung NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumorclassificationgene pairmolecular subtypenon-small cell lung cancersingle sample predictortumor histology

Identifiers

PMID30721923
PMCPMC7299291

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.