ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022
Feature Selection and Molecular Classification of Cancer Phenotypes: A Comparative Study.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. 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.
- Biomarker identification of triple negative breast cancer subtypes using machine learning.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2026Article
- Machine learning used to study risk factors for chronic diseases: A scoping review.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- A hybrid PROSAIL inversion framework for winter wheat LCC using hyperspectral data and transfer learning.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Article
- Machine learning for pan-cancer classification based on RNA sequencing data.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Review
- Cost Matrix of Molecular Pathology in Glioma-Towards AI-Driven Rational Molecular Testing and Precision Care for the Future.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Hierarchical Voting-Based Feature Selection and Ensemble Learning Model Scheme for Glioma Grading with Clinical and Molecular Characteristics.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
Abstract
The classification of high dimensional gene expression data is key to the development of effective diagnostic and prognostic tools. Feature selection involves finding the best subset with the highest power in predicting class labels. Here, we conducted a comparative study focused on different combinations of feature selectors (Chi-Squared, mRMR, Relief-F, and Genetic Algorithms) and classification learning algorithms (Random Forests, PLS-DA, SVM, Regularized Logistic/Multinomial Regression, and kNN) to identify those with the best predictive capacity. The performance of each combination is evaluated through an empirical study on three benchmark cancer-related microarray datasets. Our results first suggest that the quality of the data relevant to the target classes is key for the successful classification of cancer phenotypes. We also proved that, for a given classification learning algorithm and dataset, all filters have a similar performance. Interestingly, filters achieve comparable or even better results with respect to the GA-based wrappers, while also being easier and faster to implement. Taken together, our findings suggest that simple, well-established feature selectors in combination with optimized classifiers guarantee good performances, with no need for complicated and computationally demanding methodologies.
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.