ArticleBioData mining2025
Using artificial intelligence (AI) to model clinical variant reporting for next generation sequencing (NGS) oncology assays.
Article in BioData mining, 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.
- Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into colorectal cancer reporting.The Journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Molecular Pathology, Artificial Intelligence, and New Technologies in Hematologic Diagnostics: Translational Opportunities and Practical Considerations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Harnessing artificial intelligence for genomic variant prediction: advances, challenges, and future directions.GigaScience · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTargeted next generation sequencing (NGS) of somatic DNA is now routinely used for diagnostic and predictive reporting in the oncology clinic. The expert genomic analysis required for NGS assays remains a bottleneck to scaling the volume of patients being assessed. This study harnesses data from targeted clinical sequencing to build machine learning models that predict whether patient variants should be reported.
methodsThree somatic assays were used to build machine learning prediction models using the estimators Logistic Regression, Random Forest, XGBoost and Neural Networks. Using manual expert curation to select reportable variants as ground truth, we built models to classify clinically reportable variants. Assays were performed between 2020 and 2023 yielding 1,350,018 variants and used to report on 10,116 patients. All variants, together with 211 annotations and sequencing features, were used by the models to predict the likelihood of variants being reported.
resultsThe tree-based ensemble models performed consistently well achieving between 0.904 and 0.996 on the precision recall/area under the curve (PRC AUC) metric when predicting whether a variant should be reported. To assist model explainability, individual model predictions were presented to users within a tertiary analysis platform as a waterfall plot showing individual feature contributions and their values for the variant. Over 30% of the model performance was due to features sourced from statistics derived in-house from the sequencing assay precluding easy generalization of the models to other assays or other laboratories.
conclusionsLongitudinally acquired NGS assay data provide a strong basis for machine learning models for decision support to select variants for clinical oncology reports. The models provide a framework for consistent reporting practices and reducing inter-reviewer variability. To improve model transparency, individual variant predictions are able to be presented as part of reviewer workflows.
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.