Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39223659›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024

Does combining numerous data types in multi-omics data improve or hinder performance in survival prediction? Insights from a large-scale benchmark study.

Yingxia Li, Tobias Herold, Ulrich Mansmann, Roman Hornung

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. AI-assisted multimodal data integration for precision oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yingxia LiInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. liyingxia1991@hotmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4501-5834
Tobias HeroldLaboratory for Leukemia Diagnostics, Department of Medicine III, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9615-9432
Ulrich MansmannInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9955-8906
Roman HornungInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6036-1495

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPredictive modeling based on multi-omics data, which incorporates several types of omics data for the same patients, has shown potential to outperform single-omics predictive modeling. Most research in this domain focuses on incorporating numerous data types, despite the complexity and cost of acquiring them. The prevailing assumption is that increasing the number of data types necessarily improves predictive performance. However, the integration of less informative or redundant data types could potentially hinder this performance. Therefore, identifying the most effective combinations of omics data types that enhance predictive performance is critical for cost-effective and accurate predictions.

methodsIn this study, we systematically evaluated the predictive performance of all 31 possible combinations including at least one of five genomic data types (mRNA, miRNA, methylation, DNAseq, and copy number variation) using 14 cancer datasets with right-censored survival outcomes, publicly available from the TCGA database. We employed various prediction methods and up-weighted clinical data in every model to leverage their predictive importance. Harrell's C-index and the integrated Brier Score were used as performance measures. To assess the robustness of our findings, we performed a bootstrap analysis at the level of the included datasets. Statistical testing was conducted for key results, limiting the number of tests to ensure a low risk of false positives.

resultsContrary to expectations, we found that using only mRNA data or a combination of mRNA and miRNA data was sufficient for most cancer types. For some cancer types, the additional inclusion of methylation data led to improved prediction results. Far from enhancing performance, the introduction of more data types most often resulted in a decline in performance, which varied between the two performance measures.

conclusionsOur findings challenge the prevailing notion that combining multiple omics data types in multi-omics survival prediction improves predictive performance. Thus, the widespread approach in multi-omics prediction of incorporating as many data types as possible should be reconsidered to avoid suboptimal prediction results and unnecessary expenditure.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingGenomicsNeoplasmsHumansMultiomicsPrognosisSurvival AnalysisBenchmarkCancerMulti-omics dataPredictionSurvival analysisTCGA

Identifiers

PMID39223659
PMCPMC11370316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.