Abstract
Model-based prediction is dependent on many choices ranging from the sample collection and prediction endpoint to the choice of algorithm and its parameters. Here we studied the effects of such choices, exemplified by predicting sensitivity (as IC50) of cancer cell lines towards a variety of compounds. For this, we used three independent sample collections and applied several machine learning algorithms for predicting a variety of endpoints for drug response. We compared all possible models for combinations of sample collections, algorithm, drug, and labeling to an identically generated null model. The predictability of treatment effects varies among compounds, i.e. response could be predicted for some but not for all. The choice of sample collection plays a major role towards lowering the prediction error, as does sample size. However, we found that no algorithm was able to consistently outperform the other and there was no significant difference between regression and two- or three class predictors in this experimental setting. These results indicate that response-modeling projects should direct efforts mainly towards sample collection and data quality, rather than method adjustment.
MeSH Terms
Algorithms
Antineoplastic Agents/pharmacology
Artificial Intelligence/standards
Cell Line, Tumor
Cell Proliferation/drug effects
Forecasting/methods
Gene Expression/drug effects
Humans
Inhibitory Concentration 50
Microarray Analysis
Models, Biological
Neoplasms/drug therapy
Pattern Recognition, Automated/standards
Sample Size
Chemicals
Antineoplastic Agents
Authors & Affiliations
3 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Bayer Immanuel
Aachen Institute for Advanced Study in Computational Engineering Science (AICES), RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Groth Philip
Schneckener Sebastian
References (13)
13 references, click to expand
-
Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information.
Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jan;40(Database issue):D13-25
PMID: 22140104
-
Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent.
J Stat Softw. 2010;33(1):1-22
PMID: 20808728
-
Update on NCI in vitro drug screen utilities.
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Apr;40(6):785-93
PMID: 15120034
-
Gene selection and classification of microarray data using random forest.
BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Jan 06;7:3
PMID: 16398926
-
The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study of common practices for the development and validation of microarray-based predictive models.
Nat Biotechnol. 2010 Aug;28(8):827-38
PMID: 20676074
-
Knowledge-based analysis of microarray gene expression data by using support vector machines.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jan 4;97(1):262-7
PMID: 10618406
-
CellMiner: a web-based suite of genomic and pharmacologic tools to explore transcript and drug patterns in the NCI-60 cell line set.
Cancer Res. 2012 Jul 15;72(14):3499-511
PMID: 22802077
-
Predicting in vitro drug sensitivity using Random Forests.
Bioinformatics. 2011 Jan 15;27(2):220-4
PMID: 21134890
-
Quantifying stability in gene list ranking across microarray derived clinical biomarkers.
BMC Med Genomics. 2011 Oct 14;4:73
PMID: 21996057
-
A comprehensive comparison of random forests and support vector machines for microarray-based cancer classification.
BMC Bioinformatics. 2008 Jul 22;9:319
PMID: 18647401
-
Robust estimators for expression analysis.
Bioinformatics. 2002 Dec;18(12):1585-92
PMID: 12490442
-
Classification of gene microarrays by penalized logistic regression.
Biostatistics. 2004 Jul;5(3):427-43
PMID: 15208204
-
ArrayExpress update--from an archive of functional genomics experiments to the atlas of gene expression.
Nucleic Acids Res. 2009 Jan;37(Database issue):D868-72
PMID: 19015125