A Contrastive Variational AutoEncoder for NSCLC Survival Prediction with Missing Modalities
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Predicting survival outcomes for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is challenging due to the different individual prognostic features. This task can benefit from the integration of whole-slide images, bulk transcriptomics, and DNA methylation, which offer complementary views of the patient's condition at diagnosis. However, real-world clinical datasets are often incomplete, with entire modalities missing for a significant fraction of patients. State-of-the-art models rely on available data to create patient-level representations or use generative models to infer missing modalities, but they lack robustness in cases of severe missingness. We propose a Multimodal Contrastive Variational AutoEncoder (MCVAE) to address this issue: modality-specific variational encoders capture the uncertainty in each data source, and a fusion bottleneck with learned gating mechanisms is introduced to normalize the contributions from present modalities. We propose a multi-task objective that combines survival loss and reconstruction loss to regularize patient representations, along with a cross-modal contrastive loss that enforces cross-modal alignment in the latent space. During training, we apply stochastic modality masking to improve the robustness to arbitrary missingness patterns. Extensive evaluations on the TCGA-LUAD (n=475) and TCGA-LUSC (n=446) datasets demonstrate the efficacy of our approach in predicting disease-specific survival (DSS) and its robustness to severe missingness scenarios compared to two state-of-the-art models. Finally, we bring some clarifications on multimodal integration by testing our model on all subsets of modalities, finding that integration is not always beneficial to the task.
Results and benchmarks
Predicting survival outcomes for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is challenging due to the different individual prognostic features.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Models
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPX