Cargando…

Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings

Functional gene embeddings, numerical vectors capturing gene function, provide a promising way to integrate functional gene information into machine learning models. These embeddings are learnt by applying self-supervised machine-learning algorithms on various data types including quantitative omics...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brechtmann, Felix, Bechtler, Thibault, Londhe, Shubhankar, Mertes, Christian, Gagneur, Julien
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37942285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqad095
_version_ 1785131935243173888
author Brechtmann, Felix
Bechtler, Thibault
Londhe, Shubhankar
Mertes, Christian
Gagneur, Julien
author_facet Brechtmann, Felix
Bechtler, Thibault
Londhe, Shubhankar
Mertes, Christian
Gagneur, Julien
author_sort Brechtmann, Felix
collection PubMed
description Functional gene embeddings, numerical vectors capturing gene function, provide a promising way to integrate functional gene information into machine learning models. These embeddings are learnt by applying self-supervised machine-learning algorithms on various data types including quantitative omics measurements, protein–protein interaction networks and literature. However, downstream evaluations comparing alternative data modalities used to construct functional gene embeddings have been lacking. Here we benchmarked functional gene embeddings obtained from various data modalities for predicting disease-gene lists, cancer drivers, phenotype–gene associations and scores from genome-wide association studies. Off-the-shelf predictors trained on precomputed embeddings matched or outperformed dedicated state-of-the-art predictors, demonstrating their high utility. Embeddings based on literature and protein–protein interactions inferred from low-throughput experiments outperformed embeddings derived from genome-wide experimental data (transcriptomics, deletion screens and protein sequence) when predicting curated gene lists. In contrast, they did not perform better when predicting genome-wide association signals and were biased towards highly-studied genes. These results indicate that embeddings derived from literature and low-throughput experiments appear favourable in many existing benchmarks because they are biased towards well-studied genes and should therefore be considered with caution. Altogether, our study and precomputed embeddings will facilitate the development of machine-learning models in genetics and related fields.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10629286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106292862023-11-08 Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings Brechtmann, Felix Bechtler, Thibault Londhe, Shubhankar Mertes, Christian Gagneur, Julien NAR Genom Bioinform Standard Article Functional gene embeddings, numerical vectors capturing gene function, provide a promising way to integrate functional gene information into machine learning models. These embeddings are learnt by applying self-supervised machine-learning algorithms on various data types including quantitative omics measurements, protein–protein interaction networks and literature. However, downstream evaluations comparing alternative data modalities used to construct functional gene embeddings have been lacking. Here we benchmarked functional gene embeddings obtained from various data modalities for predicting disease-gene lists, cancer drivers, phenotype–gene associations and scores from genome-wide association studies. Off-the-shelf predictors trained on precomputed embeddings matched or outperformed dedicated state-of-the-art predictors, demonstrating their high utility. Embeddings based on literature and protein–protein interactions inferred from low-throughput experiments outperformed embeddings derived from genome-wide experimental data (transcriptomics, deletion screens and protein sequence) when predicting curated gene lists. In contrast, they did not perform better when predicting genome-wide association signals and were biased towards highly-studied genes. These results indicate that embeddings derived from literature and low-throughput experiments appear favourable in many existing benchmarks because they are biased towards well-studied genes and should therefore be considered with caution. Altogether, our study and precomputed embeddings will facilitate the development of machine-learning models in genetics and related fields. Oxford University Press 2023-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10629286/ /pubmed/37942285 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqad095 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Standard Article
Brechtmann, Felix
Bechtler, Thibault
Londhe, Shubhankar
Mertes, Christian
Gagneur, Julien
Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title_full Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title_fullStr Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title_short Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
title_sort evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings
topic Standard Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37942285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqad095
work_keys_str_mv AT brechtmannfelix evaluationofinputdatamodalitychoicesonfunctionalgeneembeddings
AT bechtlerthibault evaluationofinputdatamodalitychoicesonfunctionalgeneembeddings
AT londheshubhankar evaluationofinputdatamodalitychoicesonfunctionalgeneembeddings
AT merteschristian evaluationofinputdatamodalitychoicesonfunctionalgeneembeddings
AT gagneurjulien evaluationofinputdatamodalitychoicesonfunctionalgeneembeddings