Cargando…

Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data

Multi-omics data, that is, datasets containing different types of high-dimensional molecular variables, are increasingly often generated for the investigation of various diseases. Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the usefulness of multi-omics data for the prediction of disease outcomes such...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herrmann, Moritz, Probst, Philipp, Hornung, Roman, Jurinovic, Vindi, Boulesteix, Anne-Laure
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8138887/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32823283
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaa167
_version_ 1783695895339991040
author Herrmann, Moritz
Probst, Philipp
Hornung, Roman
Jurinovic, Vindi
Boulesteix, Anne-Laure
author_facet Herrmann, Moritz
Probst, Philipp
Hornung, Roman
Jurinovic, Vindi
Boulesteix, Anne-Laure
author_sort Herrmann, Moritz
collection PubMed
description Multi-omics data, that is, datasets containing different types of high-dimensional molecular variables, are increasingly often generated for the investigation of various diseases. Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the usefulness of multi-omics data for the prediction of disease outcomes such as survival time. It is also unclear which methods are most appropriate to derive such prediction models. We aim to give some answers to these questions through a large-scale benchmark study using real data. Different prediction methods from machine learning and statistics were applied on 18 multi-omics cancer datasets (35 to 1000 observations, up to 100 000 variables) from the database ‘The Cancer Genome Atlas’ (TCGA). The considered outcome was the (censored) survival time. Eleven methods based on boosting, penalized regression and random forest were compared, comprising both methods that do and that do not take the group structure of the omics variables into account. The Kaplan–Meier estimate and a Cox model using only clinical variables were used as reference methods. The methods were compared using several repetitions of 5-fold cross-validation. Uno’s C-index and the integrated Brier score served as performance metrics. The results indicate that methods taking into account the multi-omics structure have a slightly better prediction performance. Taking this structure into account can protect the predictive information in low-dimensional groups—especially clinical variables—from not being exploited during prediction. Moreover, only the block forest method outperformed the Cox model on average, and only slightly. This indicates, as a by-product of our study, that in the considered TCGA studies the utility of multi-omics data for prediction purposes was limited. Contact:  moritz.herrmann@stat.uni-muenchen.de, +49 89 2180 3198 Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Briefings in Bioinformatics online. All analyses are reproducible using R code freely available on Github.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8138887
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81388872021-05-25 Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data Herrmann, Moritz Probst, Philipp Hornung, Roman Jurinovic, Vindi Boulesteix, Anne-Laure Brief Bioinform Method Review Multi-omics data, that is, datasets containing different types of high-dimensional molecular variables, are increasingly often generated for the investigation of various diseases. Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the usefulness of multi-omics data for the prediction of disease outcomes such as survival time. It is also unclear which methods are most appropriate to derive such prediction models. We aim to give some answers to these questions through a large-scale benchmark study using real data. Different prediction methods from machine learning and statistics were applied on 18 multi-omics cancer datasets (35 to 1000 observations, up to 100 000 variables) from the database ‘The Cancer Genome Atlas’ (TCGA). The considered outcome was the (censored) survival time. Eleven methods based on boosting, penalized regression and random forest were compared, comprising both methods that do and that do not take the group structure of the omics variables into account. The Kaplan–Meier estimate and a Cox model using only clinical variables were used as reference methods. The methods were compared using several repetitions of 5-fold cross-validation. Uno’s C-index and the integrated Brier score served as performance metrics. The results indicate that methods taking into account the multi-omics structure have a slightly better prediction performance. Taking this structure into account can protect the predictive information in low-dimensional groups—especially clinical variables—from not being exploited during prediction. Moreover, only the block forest method outperformed the Cox model on average, and only slightly. This indicates, as a by-product of our study, that in the considered TCGA studies the utility of multi-omics data for prediction purposes was limited. Contact:  moritz.herrmann@stat.uni-muenchen.de, +49 89 2180 3198 Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Briefings in Bioinformatics online. All analyses are reproducible using R code freely available on Github. Oxford University Press 2020-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8138887/ /pubmed/32823283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaa167 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Method Review
Herrmann, Moritz
Probst, Philipp
Hornung, Roman
Jurinovic, Vindi
Boulesteix, Anne-Laure
Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title_full Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title_fullStr Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title_full_unstemmed Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title_short Large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
title_sort large-scale benchmark study of survival prediction methods using multi-omics data
topic Method Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8138887/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32823283
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaa167
work_keys_str_mv AT herrmannmoritz largescalebenchmarkstudyofsurvivalpredictionmethodsusingmultiomicsdata
AT probstphilipp largescalebenchmarkstudyofsurvivalpredictionmethodsusingmultiomicsdata
AT hornungroman largescalebenchmarkstudyofsurvivalpredictionmethodsusingmultiomicsdata
AT jurinovicvindi largescalebenchmarkstudyofsurvivalpredictionmethodsusingmultiomicsdata
AT boulesteixannelaure largescalebenchmarkstudyofsurvivalpredictionmethodsusingmultiomicsdata