4.8 Article

Highly accurate two-gene classifier for differentiating gastrointestinal stromal tumors and leiomyosarcomas

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0611373104

Keywords

cancer; classification; diagnostic; machine learning; molecular signature

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [1K23CA109060-01, CA-16672, R01 CA098570, K23 CA109060, P30 CA016672, R01 CA098570-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [P50 GM076547] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) has emerged as a clinically distinct type of sarcoma with frequent overexpression and mutation of the c-Kit oncogene and a favorable response to imatinib mesylate [also known as ST1571 (Gleevec)] therapy. However, a significant diagnostic challenge remains in the differentiation of GIST from leiomyosarcomas (LMSs). To improve on the diagnostic evaluation and to complement the immunohistochemical evaluation of these tumors, we performed a whole-genome gene expression study on 68 well characterized tumor samples. Using bioinformatic approaches, we devised a two-gene relative expression classifier that distinguishes between GIST and LMS with an accuracy of 99.3% on the microarray samples and an estimated accuracy of 97.8% on future cases. We validated this classifier by using RT-PCR on 20 samples in the microarray study and on an additional 19 independent samples, with 100% accuracy. Thus, our two-gene relative expression classifier is a highly accurate diagnostic method to distinguish between GIST and LMS and has the potential to be rapidly implemented in a clinical setting. The success of this classifier is likely due to two general traits, namely that the classifier is independent of data normalization and that it uses as simple an approach as possible to achieve this independence to avoid overfitting. We expect that the use of simple marker pairs that exhibit these traits will beof significant clinical use in a variety of contexts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available