IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007803.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological challenges in translational drug response modeling in cancer: A systematic analysis with FORESEE

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa-Katrin Schätzle
  • Ali Hadizadeh Esfahani
  • Andreas Schuppert

Abstract

Translational models directly relating drug response specific processes that can be observed in vitro to their in vivo role in cancer patients constitute a crucial part of the development of personalized medication. Unfortunately, current studies often focus on the optimization of isolated model characteristics instead of examining the overall modeling workflow and the interplay of the individual model components. Moreover, they are often limited to specific data sets only. Therefore, they are often confined by the irreproducibility of the results and the non-transferability of the approaches into other contexts. In this study, we present a thorough investigation of translational models and their ability to predict the drug responses of cancer patients originating from diverse data sets using the R-package FORESEE. By systematically scanning the modeling space for optimal combinations of different model settings, we can determine models of extremely high predictivity and work out a few modeling guidelines that promote simplicity. Yet, we identify noise within the data, sample size effects, and drug unspecificity as factors that deteriorate the models’ robustness. Moreover, we show that cell line models of high accuracy do not necessarily excel in predicting drug response processes in patients. We therefore hope to motivate future research to consider in vivo aspects more carefully to ultimately generate deeper insights into applicable precision medicine.Author summary: In the context of personalized medicine, finding genomic patterns in a cancer patient that can predict how a specific drug will affect the patient’s survival is of great interest. Translational approaches that directly relate drug response specific processes observed in cell line experiments to their role in cancer patients have the potential to increase the clinical relevance of models. Unfortunately, existing approaches are often irreproducible in other applications. In order to address this irreproducibility aspect, our work comprises a thorough investigation of a diverse set of translational models. In contrast to other approaches that focus on one isolated model characteristic at a time, we examine the overall workflow and the interplay of all model components. Additionally, we validate our models in multiple patient data sets and identify differences between cell line and patient models. While we can establish models of high predictive performance, we also expose the deceptive potential of optimizing methods to a specific use case only by showing that those models do not necessarily depict biological processes. Thus, this study serves as a guide to interpret new approaches in a broader context to avoid the dissemination of noise-driven models that fail to serve in everyday applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa-Katrin Schätzle & Ali Hadizadeh Esfahani & Andreas Schuppert, 2020. "Methodological challenges in translational drug response modeling in cancer: A systematic analysis with FORESEE," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-23, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007803
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007803
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007803&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007803?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wright, Marvin N. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2017. "ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 77(i01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nina Kusch & Andreas Schuppert, 2020. "Two-step multi-omics modelling of drug sensitivity in cancer cell lines to identify driving mechanisms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Backer, David & Billing, Trey, 2024. "Forecasting the prevalence of child acute malnutrition using environmental and conflict conditions as leading indicators," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Mariana Oliveira & Luís Torgo & Vítor Santos Costa, 2021. "Evaluation Procedures for Forecasting with Spatiotemporal Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-27, March.
    3. Bokelmann, Björn & Lessmann, Stefan, 2024. "Improving uplift model evaluation on randomized controlled trial data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 691-707.
    4. Joel Podgorski & Oliver Kracht & Luis Araguas-Araguas & Stefan Terzer-Wassmuth & Jodie Miller & Ralf Straub & Rolf Kipfer & Michael Berg, 2024. "Groundwater vulnerability to pollution in Africa’s Sahel region," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 558-567, May.
    5. Chakravorty, Bhaskar & Arulampalam, Wiji & Bhatiya, Apurav Yash & Imbert, Clément & Rathelot, Roland, 2024. "Can information about jobs improve the effectiveness of vocational training? Experimental evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Arjan S. Gosal & Janine A. McMahon & Katharine M. Bowgen & Catherine H. Hoppe & Guy Ziv, 2021. "Identifying and Mapping Groups of Protected Area Visitors by Environmental Awareness," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, May.
    7. Albert Stuart Reece & Gary Kenneth Hulse, 2022. "European Epidemiological Patterns of Cannabis- and Substance-Related Congenital Neurological Anomalies: Geospatiotemporal and Causal Inferential Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-35, December.
    8. Giorgos Foutzopoulos & Nikolaos Pandis & Michail Tsagris, 2024. "Predicting Full Retirement Attainment of NBA Players," Working Papers 2403, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    9. Michael Parzinger & Lucia Hanfstaengl & Ferdinand Sigg & Uli Spindler & Ulrich Wellisch & Markus Wirnsberger, 2020. "Residual Analysis of Predictive Modelling Data for Automated Fault Detection in Building’s Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Van Belle, Jente & Guns, Tias & Verbeke, Wouter, 2021. "Using shared sell-through data to forecast wholesaler demand in multi-echelon supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 466-479.
    11. Albert Stuart Reece & Gary Kenneth Hulse, 2022. "European Epidemiological Patterns of Cannabis- and Substance-Related Body Wall Congenital Anomalies: Geospatiotemporal and Causal Inferential Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-38, July.
    12. Philipp Bach & Victor Chernozhukov & Malte S. Kurz & Martin Spindler & Sven Klaassen, 2021. "DoubleML -- An Object-Oriented Implementation of Double Machine Learning in R," Papers 2103.09603, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    13. Marchetto, Elisa & Da Re, Daniele & Tordoni, Enrico & Bazzichetto, Manuele & Zannini, Piero & Celebrin, Simone & Chieffallo, Ludovico & Malavasi, Marco & Rocchini, Duccio, 2023. "Testing the effect of sample prevalence and sampling methods on probability- and favourability-based SDMs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 477(C).
    14. Jorge Luis Andrade & José Luis Valencia, 2022. "A Fuzzy Random Survival Forest for Predicting Lapses in Insurance Portfolios Containing Imprecise Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Eeva-Katri Kumpula & Pauline Norris & Adam C Pomerleau, 2020. "Stocks of paracetamol products stored in urban New Zealand households: A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, June.
    16. Michael Bucker & Gero Szepannek & Alicja Gosiewska & Przemyslaw Biecek, 2020. "Transparency, Auditability and eXplainability of Machine Learning Models in Credit Scoring," Papers 2009.13384, arXiv.org.
    17. Jian Lu & Raheel Ahmad & Thomas Nguyen & Jeffrey Cifello & Humza Hemani & Jiangyuan Li & Jinguo Chen & Siyi Li & Jing Wang & Achouak Achour & Joseph Chen & Meagan Colie & Ana Lustig & Christopher Dunn, 2022. "Heterogeneity and transcriptome changes of human CD8+ T cells across nine decades of life," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    18. Timo Schulte & Tillmann Wurz & Oliver Groene & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2023. "Big Data Analytics to Reduce Preventable Hospitalizations—Using Real-World Data to Predict Ambulatory Care-Sensitive Conditions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Bennett, Donyetta & Mekelburg, Erik & Strauss, Jack & Williams, T.H., 2024. "Unlocking the black box of sentiment and cryptocurrency: What, which, why, when and how?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    20. Fogliato Riccardo & Oliveira Natalia L. & Yurko Ronald, 2021. "TRAP: a predictive framework for the Assessment of Performance in Trail Running," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 129-143, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007803. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.