ArticleBMC cancer2019
Comparing biological information contained in mRNA and non-coding RNAs for classification of lung cancer patients.
Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The mechanistic role of non-coding RNAs in febrile seizures in children: their potential as biomarkers and therapeutic targets-a systematic review.Translational pediatrics · 2025Review
- AI/ML advances in non-small cell lung cancer biomarker discovery.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Machine-Learning-Based Late Fusion on Multi-Omics and Multi-Scale Data for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Deep Learning for Human Disease Detection, Subtype Classification, and Treatment Response Prediction Using Epigenomic Data.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Non-small-cell lung cancer classification via RNA-Seq and histology imaging probability fusion.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Ensuring the Robustness and Reliability of Data-Driven Knowledge Discovery Models in Production and Manufacturing.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2021Review
- Combining deep learning with token selection for patient phenotyping from electronic health records.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- An Introductory Review of Deep Learning for Prediction Models With Big Data.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeciphering the meaning of the human DNA is an outstanding goal which would revolutionize medicine and our way for treating diseases. In recent years, non-coding RNAs have attracted much attention and shown to be functional in part. Yet the importance of these RNAs especially for higher biological functions remains under investigation.
methodsIn this paper, we analyze RNA-seq data, including non-coding and protein coding RNAs, from lung adenocarcinoma patients, a histologic subtype of non-small-cell lung cancer, with deep learning neural networks and other state-of-the-art classification methods. The purpose of our paper is three-fold. First, we compare the classification performance of different versions of deep belief networks with SVMs, decision trees and random forests. Second, we compare the classification capabilities of protein coding and non-coding RNAs. Third, we study the influence of feature selection on the classification performance.
resultsAs a result, we find that deep belief networks perform at least competitively to other state-of-the-art classifiers. Second, data from non-coding RNAs perform better than coding RNAs across a number of different classification methods. This demonstrates the equivalence of predictive information as captured by non-coding RNAs compared to protein coding RNAs, conventionally used in computational diagnostics tasks. Third, we find that feature selection has in general a negative effect on the classification performance which means that unfiltered data with all features give the best classification results.
conclusionsOur study is the first to use ncRNAs beyond miRNAs for the computational classification of cancer and for performing a direct comparison of the classification capabilities of protein coding RNAs and non-coding RNAs.
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.