Cited by 122Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsGenomics and Rare Diseases

Machine learning for genetics-based classification and treatment response prediction in cancer of unknown primary

Open access
Moon, Intae, LoPiccolo, Jaclyn, Baca, Sylvan C., Sholl, Lynette M., Kehl, Kenneth L., Hassett, Michael J., Liu, David, Schrag, Deborah +1 more·2023·Nature Medicine

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a type of cancer that cannot be traced back to its primary site and accounts for 3-5% of all cancers. Established targeted therapies are lacking for CUP, leading to generally poor outcomes. We developed OncoNPC, a machine-learning classifier trained on targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) data from 36,445 tumors across 22 cancer types from three institutions. Oncology NGS-based primary cancer-type classifier (OncoNPC) achieved a weighted F1 score of 0.942 for high confidence predictions ([Formula: see text]) on held-out tumor samples, which made up 65.2% of all the held-out samples. When applied to 971 CUP tumors collected at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, OncoNPC predicted primary cancer types with high confidence in 41.2% of the tumors. OncoNPC also identified CUP subgroups with significantly higher polygenic germline risk for the predicted cancer types and with significantly different survival outcomes. Notably, patients with CUP who received first palliative intent treatments concordant with their OncoNPC-predicted cancers had significantly better outcomes (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.348; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.210-0.570; P = [Formula: see text]). Furthermore, OncoNPC enabled a 2.2-fold increase in patients with CUP who could have received genomically guided therapies. OncoNPC thus provides evidence of distinct CUP subgroups and offers the potential for clinical decision support for managing patients with CUP.

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 · 10.1038/s41591-023-02482-6

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • Genomics-based targeted NGS algorithms for cell-of-origin prediction have been rigorously evaluated and are being deployed and assessed for clinical utility.

    “This includes genomics-based algorithms, where targeted NGS algorithms have been rigorously evaluated and are currently being deployed and assessed for clinical utility (134, 135).”

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: 8

  1. [40]Moon I, Groha S, and Gusev A, “ Survlatent ode: A neural ode based time-to-event model with competing risks for longitudinal data improves cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (vte) prediction,” in Machine Learning for Healthcare Conference, PMLR, 2022, pp. 800– 827.
  2. [1]A. P. G. Consortium, “ Aacr project genie: Powering precision medicine through an international consortium,” Cancer discovery, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 818– 831, 2017. 28572459 PMC5611790
  3. [4]Chen T and Guestrin C, “ Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system,” in Proceedings of the 22nd acm sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, 2016, pp. 785– 794.
  4. [8]Bergstra J and Bengio Y, “ Random search for hyper-parameter optimization.,” Journal of machine learning research, vol. 13, no. 2, 2012.
  5. [11]Lundberg SM, “ From local explanations to global understanding with explainable ai for trees,” Nature machine intelligence, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 56– 67, 2020. PMC7326367 32607472
  6. [12]Janzing D, Minorics L, and Blöbaum P, “ Feature relevance quantification in explainable ai: A causal problem,” in International Conference on artificial intelligence and statistics, PMLR, 2020, pp. 2907– 2916.
  7. [16]Marschner I, Donoghoe MW, and Donoghoe MMW, “ Package ‘glm2’,” Journal, Vol, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 12– 15, 2018.
  8. [17]Chakravarty D, “ Oncokb: A precision oncology knowledge base,” JCO precision oncology, vol. 1, pp. 1– 16, 2017. PMC5586540 28890946

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moon, I., LoPiccolo, J., Baca, S. C., Sholl, L. M., Kehl, K. L., Hassett, M. J., Liu, D., Schrag, D., & Gusev, A.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Gusev, Alexander
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2023-08
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
2057-2067
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W4385628901
Cited by
122
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 4
FWCI
14.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
  • Emerson Collective
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA227237, R01CA244569, R01CA259058, P30CA008748, T32CA009172)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
cancer of unknown primary, targeted next-generation sequencing, treatment response prediction, clinical decision support, cancer subgroups, survival outcomes

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