Cooperative Modular Representation Learning for Lung Adenocarcinoma Survival Prediction from Transcriptomic and Clinical Data
JASIM, S. M.; Hezil, N.; Bouridane, A.; Hamoudi, R.
Show abstract
Accurate prognosis in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) requires integration of high-dimensional transcriptomic profiles with compact but clinically stable patient covariates. Naive fusion strategies allow the high-variance RNA-seq modality to dominate learned representations, suppressing clinical signal. We present Cooperative Modular Representation Learning (CMRL), an uncertainty-gated multimodal framework that dynamically regulates inter-modality information flow based on sample-level epistemic uncertainty estimated via Evidential Deep Learning (EDL). Each modality encoder produces a latent embedding and a scalar uncertainty score; an adaptive communication gate controls how much each module updates its representation from messages sent by the other module. A Variational Information Bottleneck (VIB) on the transcriptomic encoder further suppresses noise in the high-dimensional genomic latent space. CMRL is evaluated via 5-fold stratified cross validation on 490 TCGA-LUAD patients with matched RNA-seq (504 features) and clinical data. It achieves a concordance index (C-index) of 0.732 {+/-} 0.024, AUROC of 0.772 {+/-} 0.019, and AUPRC of 0.773 {+/-} 0.056 for 3-year survival prediction, outperforming a concatenation-fusion baseline (C-index 0.656), RNA-only (0.711), and clinical-only (0.670) variants, as well as several published LUAD survival models including CustOmics (0.625) and a whole-slide imaging method (0.675). An ablation study confirms that the uncertainty gate and evidential heads each contribute independently to the gain. Calibration analysis yields an Expected Calibration Error of 0.122, and uncertainty-stratified evaluation shows that low-uncertainty patients achieve AUROC 0.795 versus 0.681 for high-uncertainty patients, providing interpretable evidence that the gate mechanism is functioning as intended.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Features fusion or not: harnessing multiple pathological foundation models using Meta-Encoder for downstream tasks fine-tuning 95%
- Joint Clinical And Molecular Subtyping Of COPD With Variational Autoencoders 93%
- Deep transfer learning for reducing health care disparities arising from biomedical data inequality 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- STPath: A Generative Foundation Model for Integrating Spatial Transcriptomics and Whole Slide Images 94%
- DeePaN: A deep patient graph convolutional network integrating clinico-genomic evidence to stratify lung cancers benefiting from immunotherapy 94%
- FedWeight: Mitigating Covariate Shift of Federated Learning on Electronic Health Records Data through Patients Re-weighting 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Bi-level Graph Learning Unveils Prognosis-Relevant Tumor Microenvironment Patterns in Breast Multiplexed Digital Pathology 93%
- Generating hard-to-obtain information from easy-to-obtain information: applications in drug discovery and clinical inference 93%
- Obtaining Spatially Resolved Tumor Purity Maps Using Deep Multiple Instance Learning In A Pan-cancer Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Dual Adversarial Deconfounding Autoencoder for joint batch-effects removal from multi-center and multi-scanner radiomics data 94%
- Interpretable Deep Learning for Improving Cancer Patient Survival Based on Personal Transcriptomes 94%
- MultiSurv: Long-term cancer survival prediction using multimodal deep learning 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- An in-depth comparison of linear and non-linear joint embedding methods for bulk and single-cell multi-omics 94%
- Expression Graph Network Framework For Biomarkerdiscovery 94%
- SHEST: Single-cell-level artificial intelligence from haematoxylin and eosin morphology for cell type prediction and spatial transcriptomics reconstruction 94%
"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.