ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Deep learning captures the effect of epistasis in multifactorial diseases.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using deep learning models as a genetic architecture for the simulation of breeding schemes.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Data Representation Bias and Conditional Distribution Shift Drive Predictive Performance Disparities in Multi-Population Machine Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Genomic prediction of feed efficiency in boars by deep learning.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Machine learning prediction of hypertension integrating polygenic risk scores in inner Eurasian populations.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions ofFrontiers in aging · 2026Article
- Benchmarking interpretability of deep learning for predictive genomics: Recall, precision, and variability of feature attribution.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- A survey on deep learning for polygenic risk scores.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Benchmarking of feed-forward neural network models for genomic prediction of quantitative traits in pigs.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Evaluating deep learning-based image segmentation for radiotherapy planning in pelvic and abdominal cancers.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Harnessing deep learning for SNP-based disease prediction in genomics.International journal of information technology : an official journal of Bharati Vidyapeeth's Institute of Computer Applications and Management · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Polygenic risk score (PRS) prediction is widely used to assess the risk of diagnosis and progression of many diseases. Routinely, the weights of individual SNPs are estimated by the linear regression model that assumes independent and linear contribution of each SNP to the phenotype. However, for complex multifactorial diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and others, association between individual SNPs and disease could be non-linear due to epistatic interactions. The aim of the presented study is to explore the power of non-linear machine learning algorithms and deep learning models to predict the risk of multifactorial diseases with epistasis. Methods: Simulated data with 2- and 3-loci interactions and tested three different models of epistasis: additive, multiplicative and threshold, were generated using the GAMETES. Penetrance tables were generated using PyTOXO package. For machine learning methods we used multilayer perceptron (MLP), convolutional neural network (CNN) and recurrent neural network (RNN), Lasso regression, random forest and gradient boosting models. Performance of machine learning models were assessed using accuracy, AUC-ROC, AUC-PR, recall, precision, and F1 score. Results: First, we tested ensemble tree methods and deep learning neural networks against LASSO linear regression model on simulated data with different types and strength of epistasis. The results showed that with the increase of strength of epistasis effect, non-linear models significantly outperform linear. Then the higher performance of non-linear models over linear was confirmed on real genetic data for multifactorial phenotypes such as obesity, type 1 diabetes, and psoriasis. From non-linear models, gradient boosting appeared to be the best model in obesity and psoriasis while deep learning methods significantly outperform linear approaches in type 1 diabetes. Conclusion: Overall, our study underscores the efficacy of non-linear models and deep learning approaches in more accurately accounting for the effects of epistasis in simulations with specific configurations and in the context of certain diseases.
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.