2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2020.05.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of unsupervised machine-learning methods to identify metabolomic signatures in patients with localized breast cancer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
22
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 98 publications
1
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although many forecasting models for predicting outcomes after breast cancer surgery have been proposed in recent years, models for predicting recurrence within 10 years after breast cancer surgery have had major shortcomings: (1) recently proposed forecasting models have lower prediction accuracy compared to conventional models [ 6 , 7 ], (2) proposed forecasting models require use of health insurance claims data, which may be unavailable for real-time use in clinical settings [ 8 , 9 ], and (3) predictions of postoperative recurrence after breast surgery do not consider demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, quality of care and preoperative health-related quality of life [ 10 , 11 ]. Successful applications of statistical data mining and machine learning methods have been demonstrated in the medical field [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although many forecasting models for predicting outcomes after breast cancer surgery have been proposed in recent years, models for predicting recurrence within 10 years after breast cancer surgery have had major shortcomings: (1) recently proposed forecasting models have lower prediction accuracy compared to conventional models [ 6 , 7 ], (2) proposed forecasting models require use of health insurance claims data, which may be unavailable for real-time use in clinical settings [ 8 , 9 ], and (3) predictions of postoperative recurrence after breast surgery do not consider demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, quality of care and preoperative health-related quality of life [ 10 , 11 ]. Successful applications of statistical data mining and machine learning methods have been demonstrated in the medical field [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As acknowledged by [ 4 ], these findings suggest that a novel classification for PBC should rely on subgroups with a meaningful phenotypic differentiation and should be robust to different unsupervised techniques. The recognition of a meaningful phenomapping should be made collegially, i.e., based on the results of a set of methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Further, at the gene expression level, five main subgroups have been identified and combining gene expression with copy number data further refined breast cancer into integrated subgroups with different genomic and transcriptomic profiles and prognosis [ 3 ]. However, heterogeneity persists in biological features within PBC subtypes, highlighting the need to improve the taxonomy [ 4 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…On the other hand, recent years have witnessed an unprecedented development in the use of machine learning (ML) in various biotechnology, biomedicine, medical imaging and healthcare applications [ 27 30 ]. Supervised ML tools can be utilized to build predictive models involve the implementation of statistical means for learning and predicting disease status, either by including or excluding the polymorphisms genotypes [ 5 , 31 33 ]. The following are popular ML algorithms that were evaluated in the current research to predict T2DM and dyslipidemia based on the clinical parameters, demographic and polymorphism data: random forest (RF) [ 34 – 36 ]; naïve Bayesian (NB) [ 37 40 ]; eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) [ 41 43 ]; k-nearest neighbors (kNN) [ 44 – 46 ], support vector machine (SVM) [ 47 , 48 ]; probabilistic neural networks (PNN) [ 49 53 ]; multilayer perceptron (MLP) [ 54 , 55 ]; adaptive boosting (AdaBoost) [ 56 , 57 ]; gradient boost [ 58 , 59 ]; and K-star (K*) [ 60 , 61 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%