Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm.
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 compoun...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2013-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3720898?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-419a40255b4f464f92ce7eeb8c81ae08 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-419a40255b4f464f92ce7eeb8c81ae082020-11-24T21:44:20ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0187e7029410.1371/journal.pone.0070294Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm.Immanuel BayerPhilip GrothSebastian SchneckenerModel-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.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3720898?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Immanuel Bayer Philip Groth Sebastian Schneckener |
spellingShingle |
Immanuel Bayer Philip Groth Sebastian Schneckener Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Immanuel Bayer Philip Groth Sebastian Schneckener |
author_sort |
Immanuel Bayer |
title |
Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
title_short |
Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
title_full |
Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
title_fullStr |
Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
title_sort |
prediction errors in learning drug response from gene expression data - influence of labeling, sample size, and machine learning algorithm. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2013-01-01 |
description |
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. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3720898?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT immanuelbayer predictionerrorsinlearningdrugresponsefromgeneexpressiondatainfluenceoflabelingsamplesizeandmachinelearningalgorithm AT philipgroth predictionerrorsinlearningdrugresponsefromgeneexpressiondatainfluenceoflabelingsamplesizeandmachinelearningalgorithm AT sebastianschneckener predictionerrorsinlearningdrugresponsefromgeneexpressiondatainfluenceoflabelingsamplesizeandmachinelearningalgorithm |
_version_ |
1725911054991491072 |