Evaluation of different approaches for missing data imputation on features associated to genomic data

• Main Authors: Lopez-Bello, F. (Author), Naya, H. (Author), Petrazzini, B.O (Author), Spangenberg, L. (Author), Vazquez, G. (Author)
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BioMed Central Ltd 2021
• Subjects: article; genomics; human; imputation; Machine learning; missing data; pathogenic variants; profit; random forest; screening test
• Online Access: View Fulltext in Publisher

 Background: Missing data is a common issue in different fields, such as electronics, image processing, medical records and genomics. They can limit or even bias the posterior analysis. The data collection process can lead to different distribution, frequency, and structure of missing data points. They can be classified into four categories: Structurally Missing Data (SMD), Missing Completely At Random (MCAR), Missing At Random (MAR) and Missing Not At Random (MNAR). For the three later, and in the context of genomic data (especially non-coding data), we will discuss six imputation approaches using 31,245 variants collected from ClinVar and annotated with 13 genome-wide features. Results: Random Forest and kNN algorithms showed the best performance in the evaluated dataset. Additionally, some features show robust imputation regardless of the algorithm (e.g. conservation scores phyloP7 and phyloP20), while other features show poor imputation across algorithms (e.g. PhasCons). We also developed an R package that helps to test which imputation method is the best for a particular data set. Conclusions: We found that Random Forest and kNN are the best imputation method for genomics data, including non-coding variants. Since Random Forest is computationally more challenging, kNN remains a more realistic approach. Future work on variant prioritization thru genomic screening tests could largely profit from this methodology. © 2021, The Author(s).