skip to main content
10.1145/3570773.3570802acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesisaimsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

AEMVC: anchor enhanced multi-omics cancer subtype identification

Published:09 December 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

The discovery of cancer subtypes has helped researchers gain deeper insights into the study of oncology heterogeneity. However, since cancer complexity exists in various omics levels, extracting and adaptive combining complementary information across multi-omics are still challenges in cancer subtype prediction approaches.

Based on the subspace learning of multi view clustering, we propose a new multi group cancer subtype recognition model based on anchor enhancement. Firstly, we generate anchors for each view's local similarity graph structure to enhance the connectivity between samples. Secondly, the graph convolution module is used to learn the consistency similarity features and specific features of patient samples in each view. Finally, the corresponding cancer subtype clustering results can be calculated according to the self-expressive coefficient matrix of the consistency similarity features obtained in the previous step.

References

  1. Hanahan D. Hallmarks of Cancer: New Dimensions. Cancer Discov. 2022, 12 (1): 31-46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Yang H, Chen R, Li D, Wang Z. Subtype-GAN: a deep learning approach for integrative cancer subtyping of multi-omics data. Bioinformatics. 2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Mo QX, Shen RL, Guo C, Vannucci M, Chan KS, Hilsenbeck SG. A fully Bayesian latent variable model for integrative clustering analysis of multi-type omics data. Biostatistics. 2018, 19 (1): 71-86.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Yang B, Xin TT, Pang SM, Wang M, Wang YJ. Deep Subspace Mutual Learning for cancer subtypes prediction. Bioinformatics. 2021, 37 (21): 3715-3722.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Wang B, Mezlini AM, Demir F, Similarity network fusion for aggregating data types on a genomic scale. Nat Methods. 2014, 11 (3): 333-337.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Briere G, Darbo E, Thebault P, Uricaru R. Consensus clustering applied to multi-omics disease subtyping. BMC Bioinformatics. 2021, 22 (1): 361.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Network CGAR. Comprehensive genomic characterization of squamous cell lung cancers The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (vol 489, pg 519, 2012). Nature. 2012, 491 (7423): 288-288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Bache K, Lichman M. UCI Machine Learning Repository. 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Xia W, Wang S, Yang M, Gao Q, Han J, Gao X. Multi-view graph embedding clustering network: Joint self-supervision and block diagonal representation. Neural Netw. 2022, 145: 1-9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Chou CY, Chang EJ, Li HT, Wu AY. Low-Complexity Privacy-Preserving Compressive Analysis Using Subspace-Based Dictionary for ECG Telemonitoring System. IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst. 2018, 12 (4): 801-811.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Chang S, Hu J, Li TR, Wang H, Peng B. Multi-view clustering via deep concept factorization. Knowl-Based Syst. 2021, 217.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sun, Mengjing, "Scalable multi-view subspace clustering with unified anchors." Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Li, Xuelong, "Multiview clustering: A scalable and parameter-free bipartite graph fusion method." IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 44.1. 2020 :330-344.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin YJ, Gou YBA, Liu ZT, Li BY, Lv JC, Peng X. COMPLETER: Incomplete Multi-view Clustering via Contrastive Prediction. Proc Cvpr Ieee. 2021, 11169-11178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Wang H, Yang Y, Liu B. GMC: Graph-Based Multi-View Clustering. Ieee T Knowl Data En. 2020, 32 (6): 1116-1129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Wang H, Zong LL, Liu B, Yang Y, Zhou W. Spectral Perturbation Meets Incomplete Multi-view Data. Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2019, 3677-3683.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Wen J, Zhang Z, Xu Y, Zhang B, Fei LK, Liu H. Unified Embedding Alignment with Missing Views Inferring for Incomplete Multi-View Clustering. Aaai Conf Artif Inte. 2019, 5393-5400.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanzelmann S, Castelo R, Guinney J. GSVA: gene set variation analysis for microarray and RNA-Seq data. Bmc Bioinformatics. 2013, 14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. AEMVC: anchor enhanced multi-omics cancer subtype identification

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ISAIMS '22: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence for Medicine Sciences
      October 2022
      594 pages
      ISBN:9781450398442
      DOI:10.1145/3570773

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 9 December 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate53of112submissions,47%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)27
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format