Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33255759›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

An Improved, Assay Platform Agnostic, Absolute Single Sample Breast Cancer Subtype Classifier.

Mi-Kyoung Seo, Soonmyung Paik, Sangwoo Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Mi-Kyoung SeoDepartment of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Brain Korea 21 PLUS Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea.
Soonmyung PaikSeverance Biomedical Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea.
Sangwoo KimDepartment of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Brain Korea 21 PLUS Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5356-0827

Funding

Korea Health Industry Development Institute HI14C1324National Research Foundation of Korea NRF-2016M3A9B6903439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While intrinsic molecular subtypes provide important biological classification of breast cancer, the subtype assignment of individuals is influenced by assay technology and study cohort composition. We sought to develop a platform-independent absolute single-sample subtype classifier based on a minimal number of genes. Pairwise ratios for subtype-specific differentially expressed genes from un-normalized expression data from 432 breast cancer (BC) samples of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were used as inputs for machine learning. The subtype classifier with the fewest number of genes and maximal classification power was selected during cross-validation. The final model was evaluated on 5816 samples from 10 independent studies profiled with four different assay platforms. Upon cross-validation within the TCGA cohort, a random forest classifier (MiniABS) with 11 genes achieved the best accuracy of 88.2%. Applying MiniABS to five validation sets of RNA-seq and microarray data showed an average accuracy of 85.15% (vs. 77.72% for Absolute Intrinsic Molecular Subtype (AIMS)). Only MiniABS could be applied to five low-throughput datasets, showing an average accuracy of 87.93%. The MiniABS can absolutely subtype BC using the raw expression levels of only 11 genes, regardless of assay platform, with higher accuracy than existing methods.

Indexed as

breast cancerclassifiermachine learningoptimizationsubtyping

Identifiers

PMID33255759
PMCPMC7761033

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.