Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1910.14502

Assessment of Multiple-Biomarker Classifiers: fundamental principles and a proposed strategy

Waleed A. Yousef
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The multiple-biomarker classifier problem and its assessment are reviewed against the background of some fundamental principles from the field of statistical pattern recognition, machine learning, or the recently so-called "data science". A narrow reading of that literature has led many authors to neglect the contribution to the total uncertainty of performance assessment from the finite training sample. Yet the latter is a fundamental indicator of the stability of a classifier; thus its neglect may be contributing to the problematic status of many studies. A three-level strategy is proposed for moving forward in this field. The lowest level is that of construction, where candidate features are selected and the choice of classifier architecture is made. At that point, the effective dimensionality of the classifier is estimated and used to size the next level of analysis, a pilot study on previously unseen cases. The total (training and testing) uncertainty resulting from the pilot study is, in turn, used to size the highest level of analysis, a pivotal study with a target level of uncertainty. Some resources available in the literature for implementing this approach are reviewed. Although the concepts explained in the present article may be fundamental and straightforward for many researchers in the machine learning community they are subtle for many practitioners, for whom we provided a general advice for the best practice in \cite{Shi2010MAQCII} and elaborate here in the present paper.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.GNcs.LGstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Waleed A. Yousef. 2019-10-30. Assessment of Multiple-Biomarker Classifiers: fundamental principles and a proposed strategy. https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.14502

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Transcriptomic Models for Immunotherapy Response Prediction Show Limited Cross-cohort Generalisability

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed cancer therapy; yet substantial proportion of patients exhibit intrinsic or acquired resistance, making accurate pre-treatment response prediction a critical unmet need. Transcriptomics-based biomarkers derived from bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) offer a promising avenue for capturing tumour-immune interactions, yet the cross-cohort generalisability of existing prediction models remains unclear.We systematically benchmark nine state-of-the-art transcriptomic ICI response predictors, five bulk RNA-seq-based models (COMPASS, IRNet, NetBio, IKCScore, and TNBC-ICI) and four scRNA-seq-based models (PRECISE, DeepGeneX, Tres and scCURE), using publicly available independent datasets unseen during model development. Overall, predictive performance was modest: bulk RNA-seq models performed at or near chance level across most cohorts, while scRNA-seq models showed only marginal improvements. Pathway-level analyses revealed sparse and inconsistent biomarker signals across models. Although scRNA-seq-based predictors converged on immune-related programs such as allograft rejection, bulk RNA-seq-based models exhibited little reproducible overlap. PRECISE and NetBio identified the most coherent immune-related themes, whereas IRNet predominantly captured metabolic pathways weakly aligned with ICI biology. Together, these findings demonstrate the limited cross-cohort robustness and biological consistency of current transcriptomic ICI prediction models, underscoring the need for improved domain adaptation, standardised preprocessing, and biologically grounded model design.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

Large Language Model Agents for Evidence Based Genetic Disease Severity Classification

Disease severity classification for genetic conditions is subjective and labor-intensive, creating bottlenecks in genomic screening, where commercial panels vary widely in size and overlap. We developed an autonomous AI agent integrating Reasoning and Acting (ReAct) with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to classify 10,211 Human Phenotype Ontology terms. It uses American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)-endorsed severity guidelines and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) quality-of-life criteria to retrieve PubMed literature, generate interpretable reasoning chains, and independently verify claims. At the phenotype level, using expert-curated cohorts, the agent achieved 93.55% accuracy (MCC 0.9237) with 82.6% to 91.4% of claims supported by direct evidence or valid inferences. Gene-level severity was aggregated across 8,738 pairs, identifying 3,283 autosomal recessive pairs with severe or profound presentations. External validation showed 95.2% concordance with Mackenzie's Mission gene list. This system enables standardized panel design by providing reliable, automated classification supported by direct evidence.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

Harmonised benchmarking of foundation models for single-cell and spatial transcriptomics reveals context-dependent generalisation

Single-cell and spatial foundation models promise transferable biological representations, yet their generality remains largely untested across modalities, biological domains and analytical tasks. We benchmarked six representative models, Nicheformer, CellPLM, scGPT-spatial, GenePT, scELMo and Novae, using a harmonised framework spanning scRNA-seq, spatial transcriptomics and Perturb-seq. We evaluated zero-shot and continually pretrained clustering, supervised annotation, marker-gene concordance and perturbation prediction. Model performance was strongly conditional: expression-trained cell-level transformers best resolved many cell-identity tasks, spatial and graph-aware models better preserved tissue architecture, and language-derived gene embeddings were competitive for selected perturbation-response metrics. No model dominated across tasks, and rankings shifted with modality, preprocessing, tokenisation, biological prior, domain shift and metric choice. This benchmark provides practical guidance for model selection and argues that future models should be judged by biological generalisation, interpretability and perturbation-grounded validity, not by scale or leaderboard performance alone.

q-bio.GN↗