Cited by 194Gene expression and cancer classificationBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksBreast Cancer Treatment Studies

Integrating multi-omics data through deep learning for accurate cancer prognosis prediction

Open access
Chai, Hua, Zhou, Xiang, Zhang, Zhongyue, Rao, Jiahua, Zhao, Huiying, Yang, Yuedong·2021·Computers in Biology and Medicine

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background Genomic information is nowadays widely used for precise cancer treatments. Since the individual type of omics data only represents a single view that suffers from data noise and bias, multiple types of omics data are required for accurate cancer prognosis prediction. However, it is challenging to effectively integrate multi-omics data due to the large number of redundant variables but relatively small sample size. With the recent progress in deep learning techniques, Autoencoder was used to integrate multi-omics data for extracting representative features. Nevertheless, the generated model is fragile from data noises. Additionally, previous studies usually focused on individual cancer types without making comprehensive tests on pan-cancer. Here, we employed the denoising Autoencoder to get a robust representation of the multi-omics data, and then used the learned representative features to estimate patients' risks.Results By applying to 15 cancers from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), our method was shown to improve the C-index values over previous methods by 6.5% on average. Considering the difficulty to obtain multi-omics data in practice, we further used only mRNA data to fit the estimated risks by training XGboost models, and found the models could achieve an average C-index value of 0.627. As a case study, the breast cancer prognosis prediction model was independently tested on three datasets from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), and shown able to significantly separate high-risk patients from low-risk ones (C-index>0.6, p-values<0.05). Based on the risk subgroups divided by our method, we identified nine prognostic markers highly associated with breast cancer, among which seven genes have been proved by literature review.Conclusion Our comprehensive tests indicated that we have constructed an accurate and robust framework to integrate multi-omics data for cancer prognosis prediction. Moreover, it is an effective way to discover cancer prognosis-related genes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104481

Cites

39 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many methods have shown unequal contribution of different modalities to predictive performance.

    “Questioning this assumption is relevant as many methods have shown unequal contribution of different modalities to the predictive performance (see for example [36, 42]).”
  • Different modalities can add information to different degrees.

    “However, different modalities can add information to different degrees (e.g. [36, 44]).”
  • Early nonlinear fusion methods can outperform shallow methods on prediction tasks.

    “The applications of early nonlinear fusion methods reviewed here have shown that these methods can outperform shallow methods on prediction tasks (e.g. [35, 36]).”
  • For the same clinical task, a similar workflow has been adapted by researchers, but applying denoising AEs instead.

    “For the same clinical task, a similar workflow has been adapted by researchers, but applying denoising AEs (DAEs) [91] instead [35, 36].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. N. Simon, J. Friedman, T. Hastie, R.J.J.o.s.s. Tibshirani, Regularization paths for Cox's proportional hazards model via coordinate descent, Journal of statistical software, 39 (2011) 1. https://doi.org/ 10.18637/jss.v039.i05. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chai, H., Zhou, X., Zhang, Z., Rao, J., Zhao, H., & Yang, Y.
Affiliations
Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhao, Huiying
  • Yang, Yuedong
Venue
Computers in Biology and Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-07
Volume
134
Pages
104481
ISSN
0010-4825 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3163443268
Cited by
194
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Biology and Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National High-tech Research and Development Program (2020YFB0204803)
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China
  • Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2019A1515012207)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61772566, 81801132)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Keywords
multi-omics integration, cancer prognosis prediction, denoising autoencoder, pan-cancer, breast cancer, mRNA expression, risk stratification, XGBoost, TCGA
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Oncogenes, Gene Expression Profiling, Genomics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review