ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025
Automated sparse feature selection in high-dimensional proteomics data via 1-bit compressed sensing and K-Medoids clustering.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- MCOD: a memory-constrained deep learning framework for robust outlier detection in quantitative proteomics.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Proteomic signals are not equal clinical phenotypes: redefining evidence standards in arbovirus-SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactivity.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-dimensional proteomics data present significant challenges in biomarker discovery due to technical noise, feature redundancy, and multicollinearity. Current feature selection methods, including filter, wrapper, and embedded approaches, struggle with stability, sparsity, and computational efficiency. To address these limitations, we propose Soft-Thresholded Compressed Sensing (ST-CS), a hybrid framework integrating 1-bit compressed sensing with K-Medoids clustering. Unlike conventional methods relying on manual thresholds, ST-CS automates feature selection by dynamically partitioning coefficient magnitudes into discriminative biomarkers and noise.
resultsEvaluations on simulated and real-world proteomic datasets demonstrated ST-CS's superiority in feature selection capability and classification performance. In simulations, ST-CS achieved feature selection robustness with balanced sensitivity (> 80%) and specificity (> 99.8%), reducing false discovery rates (FDR) by 20-50% compared to Hard-Thresholded Compressed Sensing (HT-CS). Additionally, it attained superior F1 scores and Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC), outperforming HT-CS, LASSO, and SPLSDA in identifying true biomarkers while suppressing noise. For classification performance, ST-CS surpassed all methods in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) across varying noise levels while maintaining sparsity. Applied to Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) datasets, ST-CS matched HT-CS's classification accuracy (AUC = 97.47% for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma) but with 57% fewer selected features (37 vs. 86), demonstrating its dual strength in precision biomarker discovery and predictive accuracy. For glioblastoma data, ST-CS achieved higher AUC (72.71%) than HT-CS (72.15%), LASSO (67.80%), and SPLSDA (71.38%) while retaining a parsimonious feature set (30 vs. 58 features for HT-CS). In ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma, ST-CS further demonstrated its adaptability, attaining superior AUC (75.86%) over HT-CS (75.61%), LASSO (61.00%), and SPLSDA (70.75%) with only 24 ± 5 selected biomarkers. These results highlight ST-CS's ability to rigorously automate feature selection while balancing classification efficacy, interpretability, and scalability for translational proteomics.
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.