ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Deep Learning Feature Extraction Approach for Hematopoietic Cancer Subtype Classification.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Clustering-Based Immunotherapy Prediction for Gastric Cancer mRNA Vaccine Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Comparison of cancer subtype identification methods combined with feature selection methods in omics data analysis.BioData mining · 2023Article
- Superstorm Sandy exposureFrontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Utilization of model-agnostic explainable artificial intelligence frameworks in oncology: a narrative review.Translational cancer research · 2022Review
- Improved Machine Learning-Based Predictive Models for Breast Cancer Diagnosis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Identifying Cancer Subtypes Using a Residual Graph Convolution Model on a Sample Similarity Network.Genes · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hematopoietic cancer is a malignant transformation in immune system cells. Hematopoietic cancer is characterized by the cells that are expressed, so it is usually difficult to distinguish its heterogeneities in the hematopoiesis process. Traditional approaches for cancer subtyping use statistical techniques. Furthermore, due to the overfitting problem of small samples, in case of a minor cancer, it does not have enough sample material for building a classification model. Therefore, we propose not only to build a classification model for five major subtypes using two kinds of losses, namely reconstruction loss and classification loss, but also to extract suitable features using a deep autoencoder. Furthermore, for considering the data imbalance problem, we apply an oversampling algorithm, the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE). For validation of our proposed autoencoder-based feature extraction approach for hematopoietic cancer subtype classification, we compared other traditional feature selection algorithms (principal component analysis, non-negative matrix factorization) and classification algorithms with the SMOTE oversampling approach. Additionally, we used the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) interpretation technique in our model to explain the important gene/protein for hematopoietic cancer subtype classification. Furthermore, we compared five widely used classification algorithms, including logistic regression, random forest, k-nearest neighbor, artificial neural network and support vector machine. The results of autoencoder-based feature extraction approaches showed good performance, and the best result was the SMOTE oversampling-applied support vector machine algorithm consider both focal loss and reconstruction loss as the loss function for autoencoder (AE) feature selection approach, which produced 97.01% accuracy, 92.60% recall, 99.52% specificity, 93.54% F1-measure, 97.87% G-mean and 95.46% index of balanced accuracy as subtype classification performance measures.
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.