↓ Skip to main content

Variational Autoencoders for Cancer Data Integration: Design Principles and Computational Practice

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Variational Autoencoders for Cancer Data Integration: Design Principles and Computational Practice
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, December 2019
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2019.01205
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nikola Simidjievski, Cristian Bodnar, Ifrah Tariq, Paul Scherer, Helena Andres Terre, Zohreh Shams, Mateja Jamnik, Pietro Liò

Abstract

International initiatives such as the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium are collecting multiple data sets at different genome-scales with the aim to identify novel cancer bio-markers and predict patient survival. To analyze such data, several machine learning, bioinformatics, and statistical methods have been applied, among them neural networks such as autoencoders. Although these models provide a good statistical learning framework to analyze multi-omic and/or clinical data, there is a distinct lack of work on how to integrate diverse patient data and identify the optimal design best suited to the available data.In this paper, we investigate several autoencoder architectures that integrate a variety of cancer patient data types (e.g., multi-omics and clinical data). We perform extensive analyses of these approaches and provide a clear methodological and computational framework for designing systems that enable clinicians to investigate cancer traits and translate the results into clinical applications. We demonstrate how these networks can be designed, built, and, in particular, applied to tasks of integrative analyses of heterogeneous breast cancer data. The results show that these approaches yield relevant data representations that, in turn, lead to accurate and stable diagnosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 204 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 20%
Researcher 32 16%
Student > Master 19 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Student > Bachelor 7 3%
Other 23 11%
Unknown 73 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 50 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 10%
Engineering 15 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 3%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 79 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2020.
All research outputs
#13,168,755
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#2,765
of 12,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,485
of 460,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#103
of 332 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 460,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 332 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.