A statistical framework for genomic data fusion

MOTIVATION During the past decade, the new focus on genomics has highlighted a particular challenge: to integrate the different views of the genome that are provided by various types of experimental data. RESULTS This paper describes a computational framework for integrating and drawing inferences from a collection of genome-wide measurements. Each dataset is represented via a kernel function, which defines generalized similarity relationships between pairs of entities, such as genes or proteins. The kernel representation is both flexible and efficient, and can be applied to many different types of data. Furthermore, kernel functions derived from different types of data can be combined in a straightforward fashion. Recent advances in the theory of kernel methods have provided efficient algorithms to perform such combinations in a way that minimizes a statistical loss function. These methods exploit semidefinite programming techniques to reduce the problem of finding optimizing kernel combinations to a convex optimization problem. Computational experiments performed using yeast genome-wide datasets, including amino acid sequences, hydropathy profiles, gene expression data and known protein-protein interactions, demonstrate the utility of this approach. A statistical learning algorithm trained from all of these data to recognize particular classes of proteins--membrane proteins and ribosomal proteins--performs significantly better than the same algorithm trained on any single type of data. AVAILABILITY Supplementary data at http://noble.gs.washington.edu/proj/sdp-svm

[1]  M S Waterman,et al.  Identification of common molecular subsequences. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  K. R. Woods,et al.  Prediction of protein antigenic determinants from amino acid sequences. , 1981, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  R. Doolittle,et al.  A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[5]  C. Berg,et al.  Harmonic Analysis on Semigroups: Theory of Positive Definite and Related Functions , 1984 .

[6]  T. Steitz,et al.  Identifying nonpolar transbilayer helices in amino acid sequences of membrane proteins. , 1986, Annual review of biophysics and biophysical chemistry.

[7]  B. Gross,et al.  cDNA sequence coding for a translationally controlled human tumor protein. , 1989, Nucleic acids research.

[8]  E. Myers,et al.  Basic local alignment search tool. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  G. Wahba.  Spline models for observational data , 1990 .

[10]  D. Mould,et al.  Development of hydrophobicity parameters to analyze proteins which bear post- or cotranslational modifications. , 1991, Analytical biochemistry.

[11]  Bernhard E. Boser,et al.  A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers , 1992, COLT '92.

[12]  Michael Gribskov,et al.  Use of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Analysis to Evaluate Sequence Matching , 1996, Comput. Chem..

[13]  R. Durbin,et al.  Pfam: A comprehensive database of protein domain families based on seed alignments , 1997, Proteins.

[14]  Vladimir Cherkassky,et al.  The Nature Of Statistical Learning Theory , 1997, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[15]  Vladimir Vapnik,et al.  Statistical learning theory , 1998 .

[16]  B. Alberts,et al.  An Introduction to the Molecular Biology of the Cell , 1998 .

[17]  Alexander J. Smola,et al.  Learning with kernels , 1998 .

[18]  Dmitrij Frishman,et al.  MIPS: a database for genomes and protein sequences , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..

[19]  F. Schluenzen,et al.  Structure of Functionally Activated Small Ribosomal Subunit , 2000 .

[20]  Christopher K. I. Williams,et al.  The Effect of the Input Density Distribution on Kernel-based Classifiers , 2000, ICML.

[21]  F. Schluenzen,et al.  Structure of Functionally Activated Small Ribosomal Subunit at 3.3 Å Resolution , 2000, Cell.

[22]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[23]  D Haussler,et al.  Knowledge-based analysis of microarray gene expression data by using support vector machines. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  A. Krogh,et al.  Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  Katya Scheinberg,et al.  Efficient SVM Training Using Low-Rank Kernel Representations , 2002, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[26]  Li Liao,et al.  Combining pairwise sequence similarity and support vector machines for remote protein homology detection , 2002, RECOMB '02.

[27]  John D. Lafferty,et al.  Diffusion Kernels on Graphs and Other Discrete Input Spaces , 2002, ICML.

[28]  B. Snel,et al.  Comparative assessment of large-scale data sets of protein–protein interactions , 2002, Nature.

[29]  Jean-Philippe Vert,et al.  Graph-Driven Feature Extraction From Microarray Data Using Diffusion Kernels and Kernel CCA , 2002, NIPS.

[30]  Dustin Boswell,et al.  Introduction to Support Vector Machines , 2002 .

[31]  B. Rost,et al.  State-of-the-art in membrane protein prediction. , 2002, Applied bioinformatics.

[32]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Kernel independent component analysis , 2003, 2003 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2003. Proceedings. (ICASSP '03)..

[33]  A. Konstantinos,et al.  A Comparative Assessment , 2003 .

[34]  Nello Cristianini,et al.  Learning the Kernel Matrix with Semidefinite Programming , 2002, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[35]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Support Vector Machine Applications in Computational Biology , 2004 .

[36]  William Stafiord Noble,et al.  Support vector machine applications in computational biology , 2004 .