ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2025
Leveraging AutoML to optimize dataset selection for improved breast cancer variants pathogenicity prediction.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 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.
- Clinically interpretable deep learning for breast cancer missense variant pathogenicity prediction.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Precision in prediction: tailoring machine learning models for breast cancer missense variants pathogenicity prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Article
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
Breast cancer (BC) remains one of the most prevalent and lethal malignancies worldwide, with its onset shaped by complex interactions between germline predispositions, environmental exposures, and accumulated somatic mutations. Accurate prediction of variant pathogenicity is essential for identifying high-risk individuals, guiding early detection, and tailoring treatment strategies. However, existing computational tools often lack disease-specific training and fail to generalize across diverse variant datasets. To address this gap, we systematically benchmarked the predictive utility of four distinct variant datasets using three Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) frameworks-TPOT, H2O AutoML, and MLJAR. Our goal was to evaluate how dataset composition influences classification performance and to identify the optimal dataset for BC-specific pathogenicity prediction. Among the datasets evaluated, Dataset-2-curated from both cancer-specific and non-cancer databases, consistently yielded the highest predictive performance across all frameworks. H2O AutoML achieved a peak accuracy of 99.99 %, while TPOT and MLJAR also exhibited robust generalization on this dataset. Feature importance analyses revealed strong convergence across frameworks, highlighting conservation scores and pathogenicity metrics as dominant predictors. Interpretability techniques including SHAP, permutation importance, and LIME further validated the biological relevance and transparency of the models. This study presents a scalable, interpretable AutoML benchmarking framework tailored to the clinical prioritization of BC variants. By demonstrating the superiority of cancer-specific, disease-relevant datasets, our findings underscore the critical importance of thoughtful dataset design in machine learning pipelines for genomic medicine. Beyond BC, this framework is readily transferable to other genetic disorders, providing a foundational tool for precision diagnostics and the advancement of personalized oncology.
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.