AUC-RF: A new strategy for genomic profiling with random forest

Human Heredity

Volumn 72, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 121-132

  Calle, M Luz ^a   Urrea, Victor ^a   Boulesteix, Anne Laure ^c   Malats, Nuria ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIC CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF CATALONIA   (Spain)

^b Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

AUC; Gene identification; Genomic profile; Random forest; ROC curve; Variable selection

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BLADDER CANCER; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENE FREQUENCY; GENETIC VARIABILITY; PREDICTION; PREVALENCE; RANDOM FOREST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SIMULATION; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM;

ALGORITHMS; AREA UNDER CURVE; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HUMANS; INTERNET; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; ROC CURVE; SOFTWARE; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS;

EID: 80053915297     PISSN: 00015652     EISSN: 14230062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000330778     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Fletcher O, Houlston RS: Architecture of inherited susceptibility to common cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2010; 10: 353-361.
2. Ioannidis JPA: Genetic associations: false or true? Trends Mol Med 2003; 9: 135-138. (Pubitemid 36626701)
3. Ritchie MD, Hahn LW, Roodi N, et al: Multifactor-dimensionality reduction reveals high-order interactions among estrogenmetabolism genes in sporadic breast cancer. Am J Hum Genet 2001; 69: 138-147. (Pubitemid 32614026)
4. Calle ML, Urrea V, Vellalta G, et al: Improving strategies for detecting genetic patterns of disease susceptibility in association studies. Stat Med 2008; 27: 6532-6546.
5. Calle ML, Urrea V, Malats N, van Steen K: mbmdr: an R package for exploring genegene interactions associated with binary or quantitative traits. Bioinformatics 2010; 26: 2198-2199.
6. Bureau A, Dupuis J, Falls K, et al: Identifying SNPs predictive of phenotype using random forests. Genet Epidemiol 2005; 28: 171-182.
7. Wei Z, Wang K, Qu H, et al: From disease association to risk assessment: an optimistic view from genome-wide association studies on type 1 diabetes. PLoS Genet 2009; 5:e1000678.
8. Breiman L: Random forests. Mach Learn 2001; 45: 5-32.
9. Diaz-Uriarte R, de Andrés SA: Gene selection and classification of microarray data using random forest. BMC Bioinformatics 2006; 7: 3.
10. Diaz-Uriarte R: GeneSrF and varSelRF: a web-based tool and R package for gene selection and classification using random forest. BMC Bioinformatics 2007; 8: 328.
11. Habermann JK, Doering J, Hautaniemi S, et al: The gene expression signature of genomic instability in breast cancer is an independent predictor of clinical outcome. Int J Cancer 2009; 124: 1552-1564.
12. Torri A, Beretta O, Ranghetti A, et al: Gene expression profiles identify inflammatory signatures in dendritic cells. PLoS One 2010; 5:e9404.
13. Yip W, Lange C: Quantitative trait prediction based on genetic marker-array data, a simulation study. Bioinformatics 2011; 27: 745-748.
14. International Schizophrenia Consortium, Purcell SM, Wray NR, Stone JL, Visscher PM, O'Donovan MC, Sullivan PF, et al: Common polygenic variation contributes to risk of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Nature 2009; 460: 748-752.
15. Boulesteix AL, Slawski M: Stability and aggregation of ranked gene lists. Brief Bioinform 2009; 10: 556-568.
16. Pepe MS, Longton G, Anderson GL, et al: Selecting differentially expressed genes from microarray experiments. Biometrics 2003; 59: 133-142. (Pubitemid 36523116)
17. Strobl C, Boulesteix A-L, Zeileis A, et al: Bias in random forest variable importance measures: illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinformatics 2007; 8: 25.
18. Strobl C, Boulesteix A-L, Kneib T, et al: Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinformatics 2008; 9: 307.
19. Calle ML, Urrea V: Letter to the editor: stability of random forest importance measures. Brief Bioinform 2011; 12: 86-89.
20. Pepe MS: The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. New York, Oxford, 2003.
21. Wray NR, Yang J, Goddard ME, et al: The genetic interpretation of area under the ROC curve in genomic profiling. PLoS Genet 2010; 6:e1000864.
22. García-Closas M, Malats N, Silverman D, et al: NAT2 slow acetylation, GSTM1 null genotype, and risk of bladder cancer: results from the Spanish bladder cancer study and meta-analyses. Lancet 2005; 366: 649-659. (Pubitemid 41176017)
23. Samanic C, Kogevinas M, Dosemeci M, et al: Smoking and bladder cancer in Spain: effects of tobacco type, timing, environmental tobacco smoke, and gender. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 1348-1354. (Pubitemid 44125293)
24. Janssens AC, Aulchenko YS, Elefante S, et al: Predictive testing for complex diseases using multiple genes: fact or fiction? Genet Med 2006; 8: 395-400. (Pubitemid 44289001)
25. Moore JH, Gilbert JC, Tsai C-T, Chiang FT, Holden W, Barney N, White BC: A flexible computational framework for detecting, characterizing, and interpreting statistical patterns of epistasis in genetic studies of human disease susceptibility. J Theor Biol 2006; 241: 252-261. (Pubitemid 43993963)
26. Wan X, Yang C, Yang Q, Xue H, Fan X, Tang N, Yu W: BOOST: a fast approach to detecting gene-gene interactions in genome-wide case-control studies. Am J Hum Genet 2010; 87: 325-340.
27. Janssens AC, Moonesinghe R, Yang Q, et al: The impact of genotype frequencies on the clinical validity of genomic profiling for predicting common chronic diseases. Genet Med 2007; 9: 528-535. (Pubitemid 47282041)
28. Pepe MS, Janes H, Longton G, et al: Limitations of the odds ratio in gauging the performance of a diagnostic, prognostic, or screening marker. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159: 882-890. (Pubitemid 38657490)
29. Lu Q, Elston RC: Using the optimal receiver operating characteristic curve to design a predictive genetic test, exemplified with type diabetes. Am J Hum Genet 2008; 82: 641-651. (Pubitemid 351726118)
30. Jakobsdottir J, Gorin MB, Conley YP, et al: Interpretation of genetic association studies: markers with replicated highly significant odds ratios may be poor classifiers. PLoS Genet 2009; 5:e1000337.
31. Kraft P, Wacholder S, Cornelis MC, et al: Beyond odds-ratios communicating disease risk based on genetic profiles. Nat Rev Genet 2009; 10: 264-269.
32. Lu Q, Obuchowski N, Won S, et al: Using the optimal robust receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for predictive genetic tests. Biometrics 2010; 66: 586-593.
33. Moonesinghe R, Liu T, Khoury MJ: Evaluation of the discriminative accuracy of genomic profiling in the prediction of common complex diseases. Eur J Hum Genet 2010; 18: 485-489.
34. Schwartz D, König I, Ziegler A: On safari to Random Jungle: a fast implementation of random forests for high-dimensional data. Bioinformatics 2010; 26: 1752-1758.
35. Meng Y, Yu Y, Cupples LA, Farrer LA, Lunetta LK: Performance of random forest when SNPs are in linkage disequilibrium. BMC Bioinformatics 2009; 10: 78.
36. Jiang H, Deng Y, Chen H, et al: Joint analysis of two microarray gene-expression data sets to select lung adenocarcinoma marker genes. BMC Bioinformatics 2004; 5: 81.