Back

Improved Prediction of Smoking Status via Isoform-Aware RNA-seq Deep Learning Models

Wang, Z.; Masoomi, A.; Xu, Z.; Boueiz, A.; Lee, S.; Zhao, T.; Cho, M.; Hersh, C. P.; Silverman, E. K.; Dy, J.; Castaldi, P.

2020-09-13 genomics
10.1101/2020.09.09.290395 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Most predictive models based on gene expression data do not leverage information related to gene splicing, despite the fact that splicing is a fundamental feature of eukaryotic gene expression. Cigarette smoking is an important environmental risk factor for many diseases, and it has profound effects on gene expression. Using smoking status as a prediction target, we developed deep neural network predictive models using gene, exon, and isoform level quantifications from RNA sequencing data in over 2,000 subjects in the COPDGene Study. We observed that models using exon and isoform quantifications clearly outperformed gene-level models when using data from 5 genes from a previously published five gene prediction model. Whereas the test set performance of the previously published model was 0.82 in the original publication, our exon-based models including an exon-to-isoform mapping layer achieved a test set AUC of 0.88 using data from the same 5 genes and an AUC of 0.94 using a larger set of exon quantifications. Isoform variability is an important source of latent information in RNA-seq data that can be used to improve clinical prediction models. Author summaryPredictive models based on gene expression are already a part of medical decision making for selected situations such as early breast cancer treatment. Most of these models are based on measures that do not capture critical aspects of gene splicing, but with RNA sequencing it is possible to capture some of these aspects of alternative splicing and use them to improve clinical predictions. Building on previous models to predict cigarette smoking status, we show that measures of alternative splicing significantly improve the accuracy of these predictive models.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.