Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40116658›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025

Benchmarking ensemble machine learning algorithms for multi-class, multi-omics data integration in clinical outcome prediction.

Annette Spooner, Mohammad Karimi Moridani, Barbra Toplis, Jason Behary, Azadeh Safarchi, Salim Maher, Fatemeh Vafaee, Amany Zekry, Arcot Sowmya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Annette SpoonerSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, High St, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5705-0602
Mohammad Karimi MoridaniSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia.
Barbra ToplisSt George and Sutherland Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Short St, Kogarah, NSW 2217, Australia.
Jason BeharySt George and Sutherland Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Short St, Kogarah, NSW 2217, Australia.
Azadeh SafarchiHealth and Biosecurity, Microbiome for One System Health, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, 160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.
Salim MaherSt George and Sutherland Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Short St, Kogarah, NSW 2217, Australia.
Fatemeh VafaeeSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7521-2417
Amany ZekrySt George and Sutherland Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Short St, Kogarah, NSW 2217, Australia.
Arcot SowmyaSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, High St, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Future Fund 2008996
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The complementary information found in different modalities of patient data can aid in more accurate modelling of a patient's disease state and a better understanding of the underlying biological processes of a disease. However, the analysis of multi-modal, multi-omics data presents many challenges. In this work, we compare the performance of a variety of ensemble machine learning (ML) algorithms that are capable of late integration of multi-class data from different modalities. The ensemble methods and their variations tested were (i) a voting ensemble, with hard and soft vote, (ii) a meta learner, and (iii) a multi-modal AdaBoost model using hard vote, soft vote, and meta learner to integrate the modalities on each boosting round, the PB-MVBoost model and a novel application of a mixture of expert's model. These were compared to simple concatenation. We examine these methods using data from an in-house study on hepatocellular carcinoma, plus validation datasets on studies from breast cancer and irritable bowel disease. We develop models that achieve an area under the receiver operating curve of up to 0.85 and find that two boosted methods, PB-MVBoost and AdaBoost with soft vote were the best performing models. We also examine the stability of features selected and the size of the clinical signature. Our work shows that integrating complementary omics and data modalities with effective ensemble ML models enhances accuracy in multi-class clinical outcome predictions and produces more stable predictive features than individual modalities or simple concatenation. We provide recommendations for the integration of multi-modal multi-class data.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGenomicsMachine LearningBenchmarkingBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleHumansLiver NeoplasmsMultiomicscancerclinical outcome predictionhepatocellular carcinomalate integrationmachine learningmulti-classmulti-modalmulti-omics

Identifiers

PMID40116658
PMCPMC11926982

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.