ArticleBMC genomics2024
SEEI: spherical evolution with feedback mechanism for identifying epistatic interactions.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDetecting epistatic interactions (EIs) involves the exploration of associations among single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and complex diseases, which is an important task in genome-wide association studies. The EI detection problem is dependent on epistasis models and corresponding optimization methods. Although various models and methods have been proposed to detect EIs, identifying EIs efficiently and accurately is still a challenge.
resultsHere, we propose a linear mixed statistical epistasis model (LMSE) and a spherical evolution approach with a feedback mechanism (named SEEI). The LMSE model expands the existing single epistasis models such as LR-Score, K2-Score, Mutual information, and Gini index. The SEEI includes an adaptive spherical search strategy and population updating strategy, which ensures that the algorithm is not easily trapped in local optima. We analyzed the performances of 8 random disease models, 12 disease models with marginal effects, 30 disease models without marginal effects, and 10 high-order disease models. The 60 simulated disease models and a real breast cancer dataset were used to evaluate eight algorithms (SEEI, EACO, EpiACO, FDHEIW, MP-HS-DHSI, NHSA-DHSC, SNPHarvester, CSE). Three evaluation criteria (pow1, pow2, pow3), a T-test, and a Friedman test were used to compare the performances of these algorithms. The results show that the SEEI algorithm (order 1, averages ranks = 13.125) outperformed the other algorithms in detecting EIs.
conclusionsHere, we propose an LMSE model and an evolutionary computing method (SEEI) to solve the optimization problem of the LMSE model. The proposed method performed better than the other seven algorithms tested in its ability to identify EIs in genome-wide association datasets. We identified new SNP-SNP combinations in the real breast cancer dataset and verified the results. Our findings provide new insights for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/scutdy/SSO/blob/master/SEEI.zip .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.