ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
A Deep Survival EWAS approach estimating risk profile based on pre-diagnostic DNA methylation: An application to breast cancer time to diagnosis.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding depression: a comprehensive multi-cohort exploration of blood DNA methylation using machine learning and deep learning approaches.Translational psychiatry · 2024Pooled it
- Application of deep learning in cancer epigenetics through DNA methylation analysis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2023Pooled it
- Integrating DNA methylation biomarkers for breast cancer risk prediction using artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Pre-diagnosis blood DNA methylation profiling of twin pairs discordant for breast cancer points to the importance of environmental risk factors.Clinical epigenetics · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies for cancer biomarker discovery based on pre-diagnostic blood DNA methylation (DNAm) profiles, either ignore the explicit modeling of the Time To Diagnosis (TTD), or provide inconsistent results. This lack of consistency is likely due to the limitations of standard EWAS approaches, that model the effect of DNAm at CpG sites on TTD independently. In this work, we aim to identify blood DNAm profiles associated with TTD, with the aim to improve the reliability of the results, as well as their biological meaningfulness. We argue that a global approach to estimate CpG sites effect profile should capture the complex (potentially non-linear) relationships interplaying between sites. To prove our concept, we develop a new Deep Learning-based approach assessing the relevance of individual CpG Islands (i.e., assigning a weight to each site) in determining TTD while modeling their combined effect in a survival analysis scenario. The algorithm combines a tailored sampling procedure with DNAm sites agglomeration, deep non-linear survival modeling and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values estimation to aid robustness of the derived effects profile. The proposed approach deals with the common complexities arising from epidemiological studies, such as small sample size, noise, and low signal-to-noise ratio of blood-derived DNAm. We apply our approach to a prospective case-control study on breast cancer nested in the EPIC Italy cohort and we perform weighted gene-set enrichment analyses to demonstrate the biological meaningfulness of the obtained results. We compared the results of Deep Survival EWAS with those of a traditional EWAS approach, demonstrating that our method performs better than the standard approach in identifying biologically relevant pathways.
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.