Author:
Van Richard,Alvarez Daniel,Mize Travis,Gannavarapu Sravani,Chintham Reddy Lohitha,Nasoz Fatma,Han Mira V.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
RNA sequencing combined with machine learning techniques has provided a modern approach to the molecular classification of cancer. Class predictors, reflecting the disease class, can be constructed for known tissue types using the gene expression measurements extracted from cancer patients. One challenge of current cancer predictors is that they often have suboptimal performance estimates when integrating molecular datasets generated from different labs. Often, the quality of the data is variable, procured differently, and contains unwanted noise hampering the ability of a predictive model to extract useful information. Data preprocessing methods can be applied in attempts to reduce these systematic variations and harmonize the datasets before they are used to build a machine learning model for resolving tissue of origins.
Results
We aimed to investigate the impact of data preprocessing steps—focusing on normalization, batch effect correction, and data scaling—through trial and comparison. Our goal was to improve the cross-study predictions of tissue of origin for common cancers on large-scale RNA-Seq datasets derived from thousands of patients and over a dozen tumor types. The results showed that the choice of data preprocessing operations affected the performance of the associated classifier models constructed for tissue of origin predictions in cancer.
Conclusion
By using TCGA as a training set and applying data preprocessing methods, we demonstrated that batch effect correction improved performance measured by weighted F1-score in resolving tissue of origin against an independent GTEx test dataset. On the other hand, the use of data preprocessing operations worsened classification performance when the independent test dataset was aggregated from separate studies in ICGC and GEO. Therefore, based on our findings with these publicly available large-scale RNA-Seq datasets, the application of data preprocessing techniques to a machine learning pipeline is not always appropriate.
Funder
NIGMS of the National Institutes of Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference75 articles.
1. Golub TR, Slonim DK, Tamayo P, Huard C, Gaasenbeek M, Mesirov JP, et al. Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science. 1999;286(5439):531–7.
2. Keyes TJ, Domizi P, Lo Y, Nolan GP, Davis KL. A Cancer biologist’s primer on machine learning applications in high-dimensional cytometry. Cytometry Pt A. 2020;97(8):782–99.
3. Tomczak K, Czerwińska P, Wiznerowicz M. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA): an immeasurable source of knowledge. Contemp Oncol. 2015;19(1A):A68–77.
4. Carithers LJ, Ardlie K, Barcus M, Branton PA, Britton A, Buia SA, et al. A novel approach to high-quality postmortem tissue procurement: the GTEx project. Biopreserv Biobank. 2015;13(5):311–9.
5. Zhang J, Baran J, Cros A, Guberman JM, Haider S, Hsu J, et al. International Cancer Genome Consortium Data Portal—a one-stop shop for cancer genomics data. Database J Biol Databases Curation. 2011;2011:bar026.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献