ReviewFrontiers in molecular biosciences2023
Machine learning for pan-cancer classification based on RNA sequencing data.
Review in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progress in the Application of Machine Learning in the Field of Single-Cell and Spatial Transcriptomics.Genes · 2026Review
- RAD18 facilitates cancer progression and immunosuppression via the AKT/mTOR/c-Myc axis: a multi-omics analysis.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Multi-omics integration reveals pan-cancer roles of ZIC family genes in prognosis, immune microenvironment remodeling, and therapeutic vulnerability.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Learning the cellular origins across cancers using single-cell chromatin landscapes.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Building simplified cancer subtyping and prediction models with glycan gene signatures.Cell reports methods · 2025Article
- Pan-cancer analysis shapes the understanding of cancer biology and medicine.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite recent improvements in cancer diagnostics, 2%-5% of all malignancies are still cancers of unknown primary (CUP), for which the tissue-of-origin (TOO) cannot be determined at the time of presentation. Since the primary site of cancer leads to the choice of optimal treatment, CUP patients pose a significant clinical challenge with limited treatment options. Data produced by large-scale cancer genomics initiatives, which aim to determine the genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic characteristics of a large number of individual patients of multiple cancer types, have led to the introduction of various methods that use machine learning to predict the TOO of cancer patients. In this review, we assess the reproducibility, interpretability, and robustness of results obtained by 20 recent studies that utilize different machine learning methods for TOO prediction based on RNA sequencing data, including their reported performance on independent data sets and identification of important features. Our review investigates the strengths and weaknesses of different methods, checks the correspondence of their results, and identifies potential issues with datasets used for model training and testing, assessing their potential usefulness in a clinical setting and suggesting future improvements.
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.