1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
|
|
4. |
- Romagnoni, A, et al.
(author)
-
Comparative performances of machine learning methods for classifying Crohn Disease patients using genome-wide genotyping data
- 2019
-
In: Scientific reports. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2045-2322. ; 9:1, s. 10351-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Crohn Disease (CD) is a complex genetic disorder for which more than 140 genes have been identified using genome wide association studies (GWAS). However, the genetic architecture of the trait remains largely unknown. The recent development of machine learning (ML) approaches incited us to apply them to classify healthy and diseased people according to their genomic information. The Immunochip dataset containing 18,227 CD patients and 34,050 healthy controls enrolled and genotyped by the international Inflammatory Bowel Disease genetic consortium (IIBDGC) has been re-analyzed using a set of ML methods: penalized logistic regression (LR), gradient boosted trees (GBT) and artificial neural networks (NN). The main score used to compare the methods was the Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) statistics. The impact of quality control (QC), imputing and coding methods on LR results showed that QC methods and imputation of missing genotypes may artificially increase the scores. At the opposite, neither the patient/control ratio nor marker preselection or coding strategies significantly affected the results. LR methods, including Lasso, Ridge and ElasticNet provided similar results with a maximum AUC of 0.80. GBT methods like XGBoost, LightGBM and CatBoost, together with dense NN with one or more hidden layers, provided similar AUC values, suggesting limited epistatic effects in the genetic architecture of the trait. ML methods detected near all the genetic variants previously identified by GWAS among the best predictors plus additional predictors with lower effects. The robustness and complementarity of the different methods are also studied. Compared to LR, non-linear models such as GBT or NN may provide robust complementary approaches to identify and classify genetic markers.
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
|
|
7. |
- Chockalingam, Priya, et al.
(author)
-
Not all beta-blockers are equal in the management of Long QT Syndrome types 1 and 2 : higher recurrence of events under metoprolol
- 2012
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 60:20, s. 2092-2099
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of beta-blockers in congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). Background Beta-blockers are the mainstay in managing LQTS. Studies comparing the efficacy of commonly used beta-blockers are lacking, and clinicians generally assume they are equally effective.Methods Electrocardiographic and clinical parameters of 382 LQT1/LQT2 patients initiated on propranolol (n = 134), metoprolol (n = 147), and nadolol (n = 101) were analyzed, excluding patients <1 year of age at beta-blocker initiation. Symptoms before therapy and the first breakthrough cardiac events (BCEs) were documented.Results Patients (56% female, 27% symptomatic, heart rate 76 +/- 16 beats/min, QTc 472 +/- 46 ms) were started on beta-blocker therapy at a median age of 14 years (interquartile range: 8 to 32 years). The QTc shortening with propranolol was significantly greater than with other beta-blockers in the total cohort and in the subset with QTc >480 ms. None of the asymptomatic patients had BCEs. Among symptomatic patients (n = 101), 15 had BCEs (all syncopes). The QTc shortening was significantly less pronounced among patients with BCEs. There was a greater risk of BCEs for symptomatic patients initiated on metoprolol compared to users of the other 2 beta-blockers combined, after adjustment for genotype (odds ratio: 3.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 13.1, p = 0.025). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly lower event-free survival for symptomatic patients receiving metoprolol compared to propranolol/nadolol.Conclusions Propranolol has a significantly better QTc shortening effect compared to metoprolol and nadolol, especially in patients with prolonged QTc. Propranolol and nadolol are equally effective, whereas symptomatic patients started on metoprolol are at a significantly higher risk for BCEs. Metoprolol should not be used for symptomatic LQT1 and LQT2 patients.(J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:2092-9) (C) 2012 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|