ArticleScientific reports2021
Pan-cancer classification by regularized multi-task learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Pan-cancer analysis shapes the understanding of cancer biology and medicine.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2025Review
- Occlusion enhanced pan-cancer classification via deep learning.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- A platform-independent AI tumor lineage and site (ATLAS) classifier.Communications biology · 2024Article
- MMP9 in pan-cancer and computational study to screen for MMP9 inhibitors.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- SVM-DO: identification of tumor-discriminating mRNA signatures via support vector machines supported by Disease Ontology.Turkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi · 2023Article
- Identification of 5 hub genes for diagnosis of coronary artery disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Mitochondrial transporter expression patterns distinguish tumor from normal tissue and identify cancer subtypes with different survival and metabolism.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classifying pan-cancer samples using gene expression patterns is a crucial challenge for the accurate diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients. Machine learning algorithms have been considered proven tools to perform downstream analysis and capture the deviations in gene expression patterns across diversified diseases. In our present work, we have developed PC-RMTL, a pan-cancer classification model using regularized multi-task learning (RMTL) for classifying 21 cancer types and adjacent normal samples using RNASeq data obtained from TCGA. PC-RMTL is observed to outperform when compared with five state-of-the-art classification algorithms, viz. SVM with the linear kernel (SVM-Lin), SVM with radial basis function kernel (SVM-RBF), random forest (RF), k-nearest neighbours (kNN), and decision trees (DT). The PC-RMTL achieves 96.07% accuracy and 95.80% MCC score for a completely unknown independent test set. The only method that appears as the real competitor is SVM-Lin, which nearly equalizes the accuracy in prediction of PC-RMTL but only when complete feature sets are provided for training; otherwise, PC-RMTL outperformed all other classification models. To the best of our knowledge, this is a significant improvement over all the existing works in pan-cancer classification as they have failed to classify many cancer types from one another reliably. We have also compared gene expression patterns of the top discriminating genes across the cancers and performed their functional enrichment analysis that uncovers several interesting facts in distinguishing pan-cancer samples.
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.