KuLGaP: A Selective Measure for Assessing Therapy Response in Patient-Derived Xenografts
Ortmann, J.; Rampasek, L.; Tai, E.; Mer, A. S.; Shi, R.; Mascaux, C.; Fares, A.; Pham, N.-A.; Beri, G.; Eeles, C.; Tkachuk, D.; Ho, C.; Sakashita, S.; Weiss, J.; Jiang, X.; Liu, G.; Cescon, D. W.; O'Brien, C.; Guo, S.; Tsao, M.-S.; Haibe-Kains, B.; Goldenberg, A.
Show abstract
Quantifying response to drug treatment in mouse models of human cancer is important for treatment development and assignment, and yet remains a challenging task. A preferred measure to quantify this response should take into account as much of the experimental data as possible, i.e. both tumor size over time and the variation among replicates. We propose a theoretically grounded measure, KuLGaP, to compute the difference between the treatment and control arms. KuLGaP is more selective than currently existing measures, reduces the risk of false positive calls and improves translation of the lab results to clinical practice.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Looking at the BiG picture: Incorporating bipartite graphs in drug response prediction 94%
- MOViDA: Multi-Omics Visible Drug Activity Prediction with a Biologically Informed Neural Network Model 94%
- TUGDA: Task uncertainty guided domain adaptation for robust generalization of cancer drug response prediction from in vitro to in vivo settings 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine learning and mechanistic modeling for prediction of metastatic relapse in breast cancer 94%
- A Bayesian Framework for Detecting Gene Expression Outliers in Individual Samples 94%
- Histology-based Prediction of Therapy Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinomas Using Deep Learning 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.