Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T11:31:08.899Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Inference of gene networks associated with the host response to infectious disease

from Part IV - Big data over biological networks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2015

Zhe Gan
Affiliation:
Duke University, USA
Xin Yuan
Affiliation:
Duke University, USA
Ricardo Henao
Affiliation:
Duke University, USA
Ephraim L. Tsalik
Affiliation:
Duke University Medical Center, USA
Lawrence Carin
Affiliation:
Duke University, USA
Shuguang Cui
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Alfred O. Hero, III
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Zhi-Quan Luo
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
José M. F. Moura
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsylvania
Get access

Summary

Inspired by the problem of inferring gene networks associated with the host response to infectious diseases, a new framework for discriminative factor models is developed. Bayesian shrinkage priors are employed to impose (near) sparsity on the factor loadings, while non-parametric techniques are utilized to infer the number of factors needed to represent the data. Two discriminative Bayesian loss functions are investigated, i.e. the logistic log-loss and the max-margin hinge loss. Efficient mean-field variational Bayesian inference and Gibbs sampling are implemented. To address large-scale datasets, an online version of variational Bayes is also developed. Experimental results on two real world microarray-based gene expression datasets show that the proposed framework achieves comparatively superior classification performance, with model interpretation delivered via pathway association analysis.

Background

From a statistical-modeling perspective, gene expression analysis can be roughly divided into two phases: exploration and prediction. In the former, the practitioner attempts to get a general understanding of a dataset by modeling its variability in an interpretable way, such that the inferred model can serve as a feature extractor and hypotheses generating mechanism of the underlying biological processes. Factor models are among the most widely employed techniques for exploratory gene expression analysis [1, 2], with principal component analysis a popular special case [3]. Predictive modeling, on the other hand, is concerned with finding a relationship between gene expression and phenotypes, that can be generalized to unseen samples. Examples of predictive models include classification methods like logistic regression and support vector machines [4, 5].

Factor models infer a latent covariance structure among the genes or biomarkers, with data modeled as generated from a noisy low-rank matrix factorization, manifested in terms of a loadings matrix and a factor scores matrix. Different specifications for these matrices give rise to special cases of factor models, such as principal components analysis [6], nonnegative matrix factorization [7], independent component analysis [8], and sparse factor models [1]. Factor models employing a sparse factor loadings matrix are of significant interest in gene-expression analysis, as the nonzero elements in the loadings matrix may be interpreted as correlated gene networks [1, 2, 9].

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] C. M., Carvalho, J., Chang, J. E., Lucas, et al., “High-dimensional sparse factor modeling: applications in gene expression genomics,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 103, no. 484, pp. 1438–1456, 2008.Google Scholar
[2] J., Lucas, C., Carvalho, and M., West, “A Bayesian analysis strategy for cross-study translation of gene expression biomarkers,” Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 2009.Google Scholar
[3] T., Speed, Statistical Analysis of Gene Expression Microarray Data, CRC Press, 2003.Google Scholar
[4] S., Dudoit, J., Fridlyand, and T. P., Speed, “Comparison of discrimination methods for the classification of tumors using gene expression data,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 97, no. 457, pp. 77–87, 2002.Google Scholar
[5] I., Guyon, J., Weston, S., arnhill, and V., Vapnik, “Gene selection for cancer classification using support vector machines,” Machine Learning, vol. 46, pp. 389–422, 2002.Google Scholar
[6] I., Jolliffe, Principal Component Analysis, Wiley Online Library, 2005.Google Scholar
[7] D. D., Lee and H. S., Seung, “Algorithms for non-negative matrix factorization,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2001.Google Scholar
[8] A., Hyvärinen, J., Karhunen, and E., Oja, Independent Component Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, 2004.Google Scholar
[9] L., Carin, J. L., Alfred Hero III, D., Dunson, et al., “High-dimensional longitudinal genomic data: an analysis used for monitoring viral infections,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 108–123, 2012.Google Scholar
[10] M. E., Tipping, “Sparse Bayesian learning and the relevance vector machine,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 1, pp. 211–244, 2001.Google Scholar
[11] B., Krishnapuram, D., Williams, Y., Xue, et al., “On semi-supervised classification,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2004.
[12] C. M., Bishop et al., Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, Springer, New York, 2006.Google Scholar
[13] J., Bernardo, M., Bayarri, J., Berger, et al., “Bayesian factor regression models in the ‘large p, small n’ paradigm,” Bayesian Statistics, vol. 7, pp. 733–742, 2003.Google Scholar
[14] A. M., Kagan, C. R., Rao, and Y. V., Linnik, Characterization Problems in Mathematical Statistics, Wiley, 1973.Google Scholar
[15] H., Ishwaran and L. F., James, “Gibbs sampling methods for stick-breaking priors,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 96, no. 453, pp. 1–23, 2001.Google Scholar
[16] R., Henao and O., Winther, “Sparse linear identifiable multivariate modeling,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 12, pp. 863–905, 2011.Google Scholar
[17] T., Park and G., Casella, “The Bayesian lasso,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 103, no. 482, pp. 681–686, 2008.Google Scholar
[18] C. M., Carvalho, N. G., Polson, and J. G., Scott, “Handling sparsity via the horseshoe,” in International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 2009, pp. 73–80.
[19] N. G., Polson and J. G., Scott, “Shrink globally, act locally: sparse Bayesian regularization and prediction,” Bayesian Statistics, vol. 9, pp. 501–538, 2010.Google Scholar
[20] A., Armagan, D. B., Dunson, and M., Clyde, “Generalized beta mixtures of Gaussians,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2011.Google Scholar
[21] A. K., Zaas, M., Chen, J., Varkey, et al., “Gene expression signatures diagnose influenza and other symptomatic respiratory viral infections in humans,” Cell Host & Microbe, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 207–217, 2009.Google Scholar
[22] B., Chen, M., Chen, J., Paisley, et al., “Bayesian inference of the number of factors in geneexpression analysis: application to human virus challenge studies,” BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2010.Google Scholar
[23] M., Chen, D., Carlson, A., Zaas, et al., “Detection of viruses via statistical gene expression analysis,” Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 468–479, 2011.Google Scholar
[24] C.W., Woods, M. T., McClain, M., Chen, et al., “A host transcriptional signature for presymptomatic detection of infection in humans exposed to influenza H1N1 or H3N2,” PloS One, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. e52 198, 1–9, 2013.Google Scholar
[25] R., Henao, J. W., Thompson, M. A., Moseley, et al., “Latent protein trees,” Annals of Applied Statistics, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 691–713, 2013.Google Scholar
[26] A. K., Zaas, B. H., Garner, E. L., Tsalik, et al., “The current epidemiology and clinical decisions surrounding acute respiratory infections,” Trends in Molecular Medicine, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 579–588, 2014.Google Scholar
[27] J., Mairal, F., Bach, J., Ponce, G., Sapiro, and A., Zisserman, “Supervised dictionary learning,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2009.Google Scholar
[28] J. H., Albert and S., Chib, “Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 88, no. 422, pp. 669–679, 1993.Google Scholar
[29] N. G., Polson, J. G., Scott, and J., Windle, “Bayesian inference for logistic models using Pólya–gamma latent variables,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 108, no. 504, pp. 1339–1349, 2013.Google Scholar
[30] N. G., Polson and S. L., Scott, “Data augmentation for support vector machines,” Bayesian Analysis, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2011.Google Scholar
[31] N., Quadrianto, V., Sharmanska, D. A., Knowles, and Z., Ghahramani, “The supervised IBP: neighbourhood preserving infinite latent feature models.” in Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2013.Google Scholar
[32] E., Salazar, M. S., Cain, S. R., Mitroff, and L., Carin, “Inferring latent structure from mixed real and categorical relational data,” in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2012.
[33] C., Hans, “Bayesian lasso regression,” Biometrika, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 835–845, 2009.Google Scholar
[34] J. O., Berger and W. E., Strawderman, “Choice of hierarchical priors: admissibility in estimation of normal means,” The Annals of Statistics, pp. 931–951, 1996.Google Scholar
[35] J. E., Griffin and P. J., Brown, “Bayesian adaptive lassos with non-convex penalization,” University of Warwick. Centre for Research in Statistical Methodology, Tech. Rep., 2007.
[36] N. G., Polson and J. G., Scott, “Local shrinkage rules, Lévy processes and regularized regression,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 287–311, 2012.Google Scholar
[37] T. L., Griffiths and Z., Ghahramani, “Infinite latent feature models and the Indian buffet process,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2005.Google Scholar
[38] A., Bhattacharya and D. B., Dunson, “Sparse Bayesian infinite factor models,” Biometrika, vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 291–306, 2011.Google Scholar
[39] H. F., Lopes and M., West, “Bayesian model assessment in factor analysis,” Statistica Sinica, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 41–68, 2004.Google Scholar
[40] J., Paisley and L., Carin, “Nonparametric factor analysis with beta process priors,” in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2009.
[41] X. Zhang and L. Carin, “Joint modeling of a matrix with associated text via latent binary features,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2012.
[42] C., Cortes and V., Vapnik, “Support-vector networks,” Machine Learning, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 273–297, 1995.Google Scholar
[43] D. F., Andrews and C. L., Mallows, “Scale mixtures of normal distributions,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), pp. 99–102, 1974.Google Scholar
[44] N. G., Polson, S. L., Scott et al., “Data augmentation for support vector machines,” Bayesian Analysis, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2011.Google Scholar
[45] Y., Xue, X., Liao, L., Carin, and B., Krishnapuram, “Multi-task learning for classification with Dirichlet process priors,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 8, pp. 35–63, 2007.Google Scholar
[46] S., Ji, D., Dunson, and L., Carin, “Multitask compressive sensing,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 92–106, 2009.Google Scholar
[47] S., Geman and D., Geman, “Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions, and the Bayesian restoration of images,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 721–741, 1984.Google Scholar
[48] C., Andrieu, N., De Freitas, A., Doucet, and M. I., Jordan, “An introduction to MCMC for machine learning,” Machine Learning, vol. 50, pp. 5–43, 2003.Google Scholar
[49] M. J., Beal, “Variational algorithms for approximate Bayesian inference,” Ph.D. dissertation, University College London, 2003.
[50] S., Kullback and R. A., Leibler, “On information and sufficiency,” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 79–86, 1951.Google Scholar
[51] M., Hoffman, F. R., Bach, and D. M., Blei, “Online learning for latent Dirichlet allocation,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2010.Google Scholar
[52] M. D., Hoffman, D. M., Blei, C., Wang, and J., Paisley, “Stochastic variational inference,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1303–1347, 2013.Google Scholar
[53] Z., Wu, R. A., Irizarry, R., Gentleman, F., Martinez-Murillo, and F., Spencer, “A model-based background adjustment for oligonucleotide expression arrays,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 99, no. 468, pp. 909–917, 2004.Google Scholar
[54] S. T., Anderson, M., Kaforou, A. J., Brent, et al., “Diagnosis of childhood tuberculosis and host RNA expression in Africa,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 370, no. 18, pp. 1712–1723, 2014.Google Scholar
[55] T., Fawcett, “An introduction to ROC analysis,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 861–874, 2006.Google Scholar
[56] B. T. S., Da Wei Huang and R. A., Lempicki, “Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources,” Nature Protocols, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 44–57, 2008.Google Scholar
[57] Y., Benjamini and Y., Hochberg, “Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), pp. 289–300, 1995.Google Scholar
[58] R., Henao, X., Yuan, and L., Carin, “Bayesian nonlinear support vector machines and discriminative factor modeling,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2014.Google Scholar
[59] X., Yuan, R., Henao, E. L., Tsalik, R. J., Longley, and L., Carin, “Non-Gaussian discriminative factor models via the max-margin rank-likelihood,” in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2015.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×