ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2021
Machine learning analysis of TCGA cancer data.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Risk Model Based on Ferroptosis-Related Genes OSMR, G0S2, IGFBP6, IGHG2, and FMOD Predicts Prognosis in Glioblastoma Multiforme.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Prospective multi-centre evaluation of guideline-based artificial intelligence to streamline multidisciplinary tumour board.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Fedratinib inhibits ovarian cancer progression by downregulating QPCT expression.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Modulatory effect of metformin and its transporters on immune infiltration in tumor microenvironment: a bioinformatic study with experimental validation.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Exploring the Mechanism of Canmei Formula in Preventing and Treating Recurrence of Colorectal Adenoma Based on Data Mining and Algorithm Prediction.Biological procedures online · 2025Article
- Cancer genomics and bioinformatics in Latin American countries: applications, challenges, and perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Neutrophil-related IL1R2 gene predicts the occurrence and early progression of myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Neural network prediction model based on Levy flight and natural biomimetic technology for its application in cancer prediction.PloS one · 2025Article
- Using In silico models to predict lymphocyte activation and development in a data rich era.Immunoinformatics (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Deep learning to assess microsatellite instability directly from histopathological whole slide images in endometrial cancer.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- A comparison of RNA-Seq data preprocessing pipelines for transcriptomic predictions across independent studies.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Enhancing cancer stage prediction through hybrid deep neural networks: a comparative study.Frontiers in big data · 2024Article
- Classifying breast cancer using multi-view graph neural network based on multi-omics data.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Transcriptomic data in tumor-adjacent normal tissues harbor prognostic information on multiple cancer types.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Applying a GAN-based classifier to improve transcriptome-based prognostication in breast cancer.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Multilayered insights: a machine learning approach for personalized prognostic assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Differential gene expression of immunity and inflammation genes in colorectal cancer using targeted RNA sequencing.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Breast cancer prediction with transcriptome profiling using feature selection and machine learning methods.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Machine Learning Algorithms for Prediction of Survival Curves in Breast Cancer Patients.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, machine learning (ML) researchers have changed their focus towards biological problems that are difficult to analyse with standard approaches. Large initiatives such as The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) have allowed the use of omic data for the training of these algorithms. In order to study the state of the art, this review is provided to cover the main works that have used ML with TCGA data. Firstly, the principal discoveries made by the TCGA consortium are presented. Once these bases have been established, we begin with the main objective of this study, the identification and discussion of those works that have used the TCGA data for the training of different ML approaches. After a review of more than 100 different papers, it has been possible to make a classification according to following three pillars: the type of tumour, the type of algorithm and the predicted biological problem. One of the conclusions drawn in this work shows a high density of studies based on two major algorithms: Random Forest and Support Vector Machines. We also observe the rise in the use of deep artificial neural networks. It is worth emphasizing, the increase of integrative models of multi-omic data analysis. The different biological conditions are a consequence of molecular homeostasis, driven by both protein coding regions, regulatory elements and the surrounding environment. It is notable that a large number of works make use of genetic expression data, which has been found to be the preferred method by researchers when training the different models. The biological problems addressed have been classified into five types: prognosis prediction, tumour subtypes, microsatellite instability (MSI), immunological aspects and certain pathways of interest. A clear trend was detected in the prediction of these conditions according to the type of tumour. That is the reason for which a greater number of works have focused on the BRCA cohort, while specific works for survival, for example, were centred on the GBM cohort, due to its large number of events. Throughout this review, it will be possible to go in depth into the works and the methodologies used to study TCGA cancer data. Finally, it is intended that this work will serve as a basis for future research in this field of study.
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.