Cargando…

Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS

The 2019 novel coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in an unsustainable need for diagnostic tests. Currently, molecular tests are the accepted standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Mass spectrometry (MS) enhanced by machine learning (ML) has recently been postulated to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rashidi, Hooman H., Pepper, John, Howard, Taylor, Klein, Karina, May, Larissa, Albahra, Samer, Phinney, Brett, Salemi, Michelle R., Tran, Nam K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9337631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35905092
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263954
_version_ 1784759793906352128
author Rashidi, Hooman H.
Pepper, John
Howard, Taylor
Klein, Karina
May, Larissa
Albahra, Samer
Phinney, Brett
Salemi, Michelle R.
Tran, Nam K.
author_facet Rashidi, Hooman H.
Pepper, John
Howard, Taylor
Klein, Karina
May, Larissa
Albahra, Samer
Phinney, Brett
Salemi, Michelle R.
Tran, Nam K.
author_sort Rashidi, Hooman H.
collection PubMed
description The 2019 novel coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in an unsustainable need for diagnostic tests. Currently, molecular tests are the accepted standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Mass spectrometry (MS) enhanced by machine learning (ML) has recently been postulated to serve as a rapid, high-throughput, and low-cost alternative to molecular methods. Automated ML is a novel approach that could move mass spectrometry techniques beyond the confines of traditional laboratory settings. However, it remains unknown how different automated ML platforms perform for COVID-19 MS analysis. To this end, the goal of our study is to compare algorithms produced by two commercial automated ML platforms (Platforms A and B). Our study consisted of MS data derived from 361 subjects with molecular confirmation of COVID-19 status including SARS-CoV-2 variants. The top optimized ML model with respect to positive percent agreement (PPA) within Platforms A and B exhibited an accuracy of 94.9%, PPA of 100%, negative percent agreement (NPA) of 93%, and an accuracy of 91.8%, PPA of 100%, and NPA of 89%, respectively. These results illustrate the MS method’s robustness against SARS-CoV-2 variants and highlight similarities and differences in automated ML platforms in producing optimal predictive algorithms for a given dataset.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9337631
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93376312022-07-30 Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS Rashidi, Hooman H. Pepper, John Howard, Taylor Klein, Karina May, Larissa Albahra, Samer Phinney, Brett Salemi, Michelle R. Tran, Nam K. PLoS One Research Article The 2019 novel coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in an unsustainable need for diagnostic tests. Currently, molecular tests are the accepted standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Mass spectrometry (MS) enhanced by machine learning (ML) has recently been postulated to serve as a rapid, high-throughput, and low-cost alternative to molecular methods. Automated ML is a novel approach that could move mass spectrometry techniques beyond the confines of traditional laboratory settings. However, it remains unknown how different automated ML platforms perform for COVID-19 MS analysis. To this end, the goal of our study is to compare algorithms produced by two commercial automated ML platforms (Platforms A and B). Our study consisted of MS data derived from 361 subjects with molecular confirmation of COVID-19 status including SARS-CoV-2 variants. The top optimized ML model with respect to positive percent agreement (PPA) within Platforms A and B exhibited an accuracy of 94.9%, PPA of 100%, negative percent agreement (NPA) of 93%, and an accuracy of 91.8%, PPA of 100%, and NPA of 89%, respectively. These results illustrate the MS method’s robustness against SARS-CoV-2 variants and highlight similarities and differences in automated ML platforms in producing optimal predictive algorithms for a given dataset. Public Library of Science 2022-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9337631/ /pubmed/35905092 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263954 Text en © 2022 Rashidi et al 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 use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rashidi, Hooman H.
Pepper, John
Howard, Taylor
Klein, Karina
May, Larissa
Albahra, Samer
Phinney, Brett
Salemi, Michelle R.
Tran, Nam K.
Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title_full Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title_fullStr Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title_full_unstemmed Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title_short Comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for COVID-19 detection by MALDI-TOF-MS
title_sort comparative performance of two automated machine learning platforms for covid-19 detection by maldi-tof-ms
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9337631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35905092
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263954
work_keys_str_mv AT rashidihoomanh comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT pepperjohn comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT howardtaylor comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT kleinkarina comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT maylarissa comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT albahrasamer comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT phinneybrett comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT salemimicheller comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms
AT trannamk comparativeperformanceoftwoautomatedmachinelearningplatformsforcovid19detectionbymalditofms