Predicting the difficulty of pure, strict, epistatic models: metrics for simulated model selection

BackgroundAlgorithms designed to detect complex genetic disease associations are initially evaluated using simulated datasets. Typical evaluations vary constraints that influence the correct detection of underlying models (i.e. number of loci, heritability, and minor allele frequency). Such studies neglect to account for model architecture (i.e. the unique specification and arrangement of penetrance values comprising the genetic model), which alone can influence the detectability of a model. In order to design a simulation study which efficiently takes architecture into account, a reliable metric is needed for model selection.ResultsWe evaluate three metrics as predictors of relative model detection difficulty derived from previous works: (1) Penetrance table variance (PTV), (2) customized odds ratio (COR), and (3) our own Ease of Detection Measure (EDM), calculated from the penetrance values and respective genotype frequencies of each simulated genetic model. We evaluate the reliability of these metrics across three very different data search algorithms, each with the capacity to detect epistatic interactions. We find that a model’s EDM and COR are each stronger predictors of model detection success than heritability.ConclusionsThis study formally identifies and evaluates metrics which quantify model detection difficulty. We utilize these metrics to intelligently select models from a population of potential architectures. This allows for an improved simulation study design which accounts for differences in detection difficulty attributed to model architecture. We implement the calculation and utilization of EDM and COR into GAMETES, an algorithm which rapidly and precisely generates pure, strict, n-locus epistatic models.

[1]  G. Mendel,et al.  Mendel's Principles of Heredity , 1910, Nature.

[2]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Spatially Uniform ReliefF (SURF) for computationally-efficient filtering of gene-gene interactions , 2009, BioData Mining.

[3]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Learning classifier systems: a complete introduction, review, and roadmap , 2009 .

[4]  L. Penrose,et al.  THE CORRELATION BETWEEN RELATIVES ON THE SUPPOSITION OF MENDELIAN INHERITANCE , 2022 .

[5]  H. Cordell Epistasis: what it means, what it doesn't mean, and statistical methods to detect it in humans. , 2002, Human molecular genetics.

[6]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  GAMETES: a fast, direct algorithm for generating pure, strict, epistatic models with random architectures , 2012, BioData Mining.

[7]  Scott M. Williams,et al.  challenges for genome-wide association studies , 2010 .

[8]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[9]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  An analysis pipeline with statistical and visualization-guided knowledge discovery for Michigan-style learning classifier systems , 2012, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[10]  D. Hartl,et al.  Principles of population genetics , 1981 .

[11]  H. Cordell Detecting gene–gene interactions that underlie human diseases , 2009, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[12]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  The application of michigan-style learning classifiersystems to address genetic heterogeneity and epistasisin association studies , 2010, GECCO '10.

[13]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  BIOINFORMATICS REVIEW , 2005 .

[14]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Routine discovery of complex genetic models using genetic algorithms , 2004, Appl. Soft Comput..

[15]  Wentian Li,et al.  A Complete Enumeration and Classification of Two-Locus Disease Models , 1999, Human Heredity.

[16]  R. Fisher XV.—The Correlation between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance. , 1919, Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

[17]  David M. Reif,et al.  Machine Learning for Detecting Gene-Gene Interactions , 2006, Applied bioinformatics.

[18]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Application Of Genetic Algorithms To The Discovery Of Complex Models For Simulation Studies In Human Genetics , 2002, GECCO.

[19]  Ester Bernadó-Mansilla,et al.  Accuracy-Based Learning Classifier Systems: Models, Analysis and Applications to Classification Tasks , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[20]  Enrique Alba,et al.  Today/future importance analysis , 2010, GECCO '10.

[21]  T. Reich,et al.  A perspective on epistasis: limits of models displaying no main effect. , 2002, American journal of human genetics.

[22]  J. H. Moore,et al.  Multifactor-dimensionality reduction reveals high-order interactions among estrogen-metabolism genes in sporadic breast cancer. , 2001, American journal of human genetics.

[23]  Debbie S. Yuster,et al.  A complete classification of epistatic two-locus models , 2006, BMC Genetics.

[24]  M. Ritchie,et al.  Exploring the Performance of Multifactor Dimensionality Reduction in Large Scale SNP Studies and in the Presence of Genetic Heterogeneity among Epistatic Disease Models , 2008, Human Heredity.

[25]  M. Wade,et al.  Epistasis and the Evolutionary Process , 2000 .

[26]  David M. Reif,et al.  A comparison of analytical methods for genetic association studies , 2008, Genetic epidemiology.