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.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-omics integration of proteomics and metabolomics in pediatric health and disease.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Biomarker discovery and patient stratification in pancreatic cancer using incomplete multi-omics data.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Multi-omics data integration using time-to event endpoint and supervised Cox penalized regression: a comprehensive review.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- ProtFI, an efficient frailty-trained proteomics-based biomarker of aging, robustly predicts age-related decline.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- The MOGA multi-modal framework based on graph augmentation networks for drug response prediction.iScience · 2026Article
- Prognostic biomarker discovery in pancreatic cancer through hybrid ensemble feature selection and multi-omics data.BioData mining · 2026Article
- AI-assisted multimodal data integration for precision oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- Transfer learning with multiomics integration and deep neural networks reveals drug resistance mechanisms in cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- fuseMLR: an R package for integrative prediction modeling of multi-omics data.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
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
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
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.