ArticleNPJ systems biology and applications2025
MarkerPredict: predicting clinically relevant predictive biomarkers with machine learning.
Article in NPJ systems biology and applications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MRI Based Radiomics as an Imaging Biomarker for Locally Advanced Carcinoma Rectum: Predicting Tumor Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy as an Organ Preservation Strategy.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Is Not Just for Prediction: Its Role as an Exploratory Analytical Tool in Medicine.Annals of vascular diseases · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Precision oncology relies on predictive biomarkers for selecting targeted cancer therapies. Network-based properties of proteins, together with structural features such as intrinsic disorder, are likely to shape their potential as biomarkers. We therefore designed a hypothesis-generating framework that integrates network motifs and protein disorder to explore their contribution to predictive biomarker discovery. This encouraged us to develop MarkerPredict by using literature evidence-based positive and negative training sets of 880 target-interacting protein pairs total with Random Forest and XGBoost machine learning models on three signalling networks. MarkerPredict classified 3670 target-neighbour pairs with 32 different models achieving a 0.7-0.96 LOOCV accuracy. We defined a Biomarker Probability Score (BPS) as a normalised summative rank of the models. The scores identified 2084 potential predictive biomarkers to targeted cancer therapeutics, 426 was classified as a biomarker by all 4 calculations. We detailed the biomarker potential of LCK and ERK1. This study encourages further validation of the high-ranked predictive biomarkers. The development of the MarkerPredict tool (which is available on GitHub) for predictive biomarker identification may have a significant impact on clinical decision-making in 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.