Cargando…

Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer

BACKGROUND: In cancer, large-scale technologies such as next-generation sequencing and microarrays have produced a wide number of genomic features such as DNA copy number alterations (CNA), mRNA expression (EXPR), microRNA expression (MIRNA), and DNA somatic mutations (MUT), among others. Several an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gómez-Rueda, Hugo, Martínez-Ledesma, Emmanuel, Martínez-Torteya, Antonio, Palacios-Corona, Rebeca, Trevino, Victor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4625638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26516350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13040-015-0065-1
_version_ 1782398012069249024
author Gómez-Rueda, Hugo
Martínez-Ledesma, Emmanuel
Martínez-Torteya, Antonio
Palacios-Corona, Rebeca
Trevino, Victor
author_facet Gómez-Rueda, Hugo
Martínez-Ledesma, Emmanuel
Martínez-Torteya, Antonio
Palacios-Corona, Rebeca
Trevino, Victor
author_sort Gómez-Rueda, Hugo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In cancer, large-scale technologies such as next-generation sequencing and microarrays have produced a wide number of genomic features such as DNA copy number alterations (CNA), mRNA expression (EXPR), microRNA expression (MIRNA), and DNA somatic mutations (MUT), among others. Several analyses of a specific type of these genomic data have generated many prognostic biomarkers in cancer. However, it is uncertain which of these data is more powerful and whether the best data-type is cancer-type dependent. Therefore, our purpose is to characterize the prognostic power of models obtained from different genomic data types, cancer types, and algorithms. For this, we compared the prognostic power using the concordance and prognostic index of models obtained from EXPR, MIRNA, CNA, MUT data and their integration for ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma (OV), multiform glioblastoma (GBM), lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD), and breast cancer (BRCA) datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas repository. We used three different algorithms for prognostic model selection based on constrained particle swarm optimization (CPSO), network feature selection (NFS), and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). RESULTS: The integration of the four genomic data produced models having slightly higher performance than any single genomic data. From the genomic data types, we observed better prediction using EXPR closely followed by MIRNA and CNA depending on the cancer type and method. We observed higher concordance index in BRCA, followed by LUAD, OV, and GBM. We observed very similar results between LASSO and CPSO but smaller values in NFS. Importantly, we observed that model predictions highly concur between algorithms but are highly discordant between data types, which seems to be dependent on the censoring rate of the dataset. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression (mRNA) generated higher performances, which is marginally improved when other type of genomic data is considered. The level of concordance in prognosis generated from different genomic data types seems to be dependent on censoring rate. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13040-015-0065-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4625638
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46256382015-10-30 Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer Gómez-Rueda, Hugo Martínez-Ledesma, Emmanuel Martínez-Torteya, Antonio Palacios-Corona, Rebeca Trevino, Victor BioData Min Research BACKGROUND: In cancer, large-scale technologies such as next-generation sequencing and microarrays have produced a wide number of genomic features such as DNA copy number alterations (CNA), mRNA expression (EXPR), microRNA expression (MIRNA), and DNA somatic mutations (MUT), among others. Several analyses of a specific type of these genomic data have generated many prognostic biomarkers in cancer. However, it is uncertain which of these data is more powerful and whether the best data-type is cancer-type dependent. Therefore, our purpose is to characterize the prognostic power of models obtained from different genomic data types, cancer types, and algorithms. For this, we compared the prognostic power using the concordance and prognostic index of models obtained from EXPR, MIRNA, CNA, MUT data and their integration for ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma (OV), multiform glioblastoma (GBM), lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD), and breast cancer (BRCA) datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas repository. We used three different algorithms for prognostic model selection based on constrained particle swarm optimization (CPSO), network feature selection (NFS), and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). RESULTS: The integration of the four genomic data produced models having slightly higher performance than any single genomic data. From the genomic data types, we observed better prediction using EXPR closely followed by MIRNA and CNA depending on the cancer type and method. We observed higher concordance index in BRCA, followed by LUAD, OV, and GBM. We observed very similar results between LASSO and CPSO but smaller values in NFS. Importantly, we observed that model predictions highly concur between algorithms but are highly discordant between data types, which seems to be dependent on the censoring rate of the dataset. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression (mRNA) generated higher performances, which is marginally improved when other type of genomic data is considered. The level of concordance in prognosis generated from different genomic data types seems to be dependent on censoring rate. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13040-015-0065-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4625638/ /pubmed/26516350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13040-015-0065-1 Text en © Gómez-Rueda et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Gómez-Rueda, Hugo
Martínez-Ledesma, Emmanuel
Martínez-Torteya, Antonio
Palacios-Corona, Rebeca
Trevino, Victor
Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title_full Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title_fullStr Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title_full_unstemmed Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title_short Integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
title_sort integration and comparison of different genomic data for outcome prediction in cancer
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4625638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26516350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13040-015-0065-1
work_keys_str_mv AT gomezruedahugo integrationandcomparisonofdifferentgenomicdataforoutcomepredictionincancer
AT martinezledesmaemmanuel integrationandcomparisonofdifferentgenomicdataforoutcomepredictionincancer
AT martineztorteyaantonio integrationandcomparisonofdifferentgenomicdataforoutcomepredictionincancer
AT palacioscoronarebeca integrationandcomparisonofdifferentgenomicdataforoutcomepredictionincancer
AT trevinovictor integrationandcomparisonofdifferentgenomicdataforoutcomepredictionincancer