It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Multiple omic profiles have been generated for many cancer types; however, comprehensive assessment of their prognostic values across cancers is limited. We conducted a pan-cancer prognostic assessment and presented a multi-omic kernel machine learning method to systematically quantify the prognostic values of high-throughput genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic profiles individually, integratively, and in combination with clinical factors for 3,382 samples across 14 cancer types. We found that the prognostic performance varied substantially across cancer types. mRNA and miRNA expression profile frequently performed the best, followed by DNA methylation profile. Germline susceptibility variants displayed low prognostic performance consistently across cancer types. The integration of omic profiles with clinical variables can lead to substantially improved prognostic performance over the use of clinical variables alone in half of cancer types examined. Moreover, we showed that the kernel machine learning method consistently outperformed existing prognostic signatures, suggesting that including a large number of omic biomarkers may provide substantial improvement in prognostic assessment. Our study provides a comprehensive portrait of omic architecture for tumor prognosis across cancers, and highlights the prognostic value of genome-wide omic biomarker aggregation, which may facilitate refined prognostic assessment in the era of precision oncology.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
2 NSABP Foundation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
3 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
4 Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, CO, USA
5 Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
6 Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
7 Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA