ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025
CYTO-SV-ML: A Machine Learning Tool for Cytogenetic Structural Variant Analysis in Somatic Cell Type Using Genome Sequences.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Although whole genome sequencing (WGS) has enabled the comprehensive analyses of structural variants (SVs), more accurate and efficient methods are needed to distinguish large somatic SVs (SV size ≥ 1 Mb) traditionally detected through cytogenetic testing from germline SVs. (2) Methods: A customized machine learning pipeline (CYTO-SV-ML) under Snakemake automation workflow was developed with a user interface to identify somatic cytogenetic SVs in WGS data. And this tool was applied for characterizing structural variation profiles in the whole blood of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs). Known SVs mapped from well-established open databases were split into training and validation subsets for an AUTO-ML machine learning model in a CYTO-SV-ML pipeline. (3) Results: The benchmarking performance of the CYTO-SV-ML pipeline on somatic cytogenetic SV classification displayed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCROC) of 0.94 for translocations and 0.92 for non-translocations, a sensitivity of 0.83 for translocations and 0.85 for non-translocations, and a specificity of 0.96 for translocations and 0.82 for non-translocations. Our method (207 somatic cytogenetic SVs) outperformed a conventional SV calling pipeline (143 somatic cytogenetic SVs) in an independent validation of clinical cytogenetic records. In addition, the CYTO-SV-ML pipeline uncovered novel somatic cytogenetic SVs in 49 (89%) of 55 patients without successful clinical cytogenetic results. (4) Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the high-performance machine learning approach of CYTO-SV-ML on benchmarking SV classification from genomic sequencing data, and further validations of novel anomalies by orthogonal methods will be essential to unlock its full clinical potential of cytogenetic diagnostics.
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.