English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/131242

A comparison of genomic profiles of complex diseases under different models

AutorPotenciano, Víctor; Abad-Grau, María M.; Alcina, Antonio; Matesanz, Fuencisla
Fecha de publicación19-ene-2016
EditorBioMed Central
CitaciónBMC Medical Genomics
ResumenBackground: Various approaches are being used to predict individual risk to polygenic diseases from data provided by genome-wide association studies. As there are substantial differences between the diseases investigated, the data sets used and the way they are tested, it is difficult to assess which models are more suitable for this task. Results: We compared different approaches for seven complex diseases provided by the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC) under a within-study validation approach. Risk models were inferred using a variety of learning machines and assumptions about the underlying genetic model, including a haplotype-based approach with different haplotype lengths and different thresholds in association levels to choose loci as part of the predictive model. In accordance with previous work, our results generally showed low accuracy considering disease heritability and population prevalence. However, the boosting algorithm returned a predictive area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.8805 for Type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 0.8087 for rheumatoid arthritis, both clearly over the AUC obtained by other approaches and over 0.75, which is the minimum required for a disease to be successfully tested on a sample at risk, which means that boosting is a promising approach. Its good performance seems to be related to its robustness to redundant data, as in the case of genome-wide data sets due to linkage disequilibrium. Conclusions: In view of our results, the boosting approach may be suitable for modeling individual predisposition to Type 1 diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis based on genome-wide data and should be considered for more in-depth research
Versión del editorhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26782991
Aparece en las colecciones: (IPBLN) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
A_comparison_JAN19_2016.pdf2,04 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Mostrar el registro completo

Artículos relacionados:

NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.