Back

Sparse Machine Learning Pipeline with Stabl Identifies Cord Blood Multi-Omic Signatures of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

Mestan, K.; Newar, J.; Zhao, J.; Chakraborty, A.; Reiss, J.; Funk, W.; Stelzer, I.; Waked, B.; Bellan, G.; Durand, X.; Hedou, J.

2026-09-18 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.09.12.748996 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Several omics studies have been completed in recent years, with the goal of identifying biomarkers of complex multifactorial diseases, such as bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Objective: To evaluate the performance of 3 distinct omics platforms, using a machine learning pipeline with integration of sparse, reliable and adaptive biomarker identification (Stabl). Methods: Using a well-characterized birth cohort, cord blood metabolomics, proteomics and adductomics data were integrated with Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression and Stabl, to evaluate predictive performance for BPD. Results: Sparse multivariable modeling of 45,000 features measured in 217 infants (52 term, 165 extremely preterm <28 weeks; 82 with BPD and 35 with severe BPD/death) identified a perfect signature for preterm birth with both LASSO and Stabl (AUROC=1.0; p<0.001). Analysis of the preterm group yielded excellent predictive power for severe BPD (AUROC=0.83; p=0.005). Stabl identified a set of 12 biomarkers (2 adducts, 3 proteins and 7 metabolites) with good performance for predicting grade III BPD (AUROC=0.76; P=0.03). Biomarkers across the 3 omics platforms revealed dysregulated pathways of innate/adaptive immune responses, metabolic programming and oxidative stress. Conclusions: The sparse machine learning pipeline is a complementary approach for identifying novel pathways and biomarkers of multifactorial BPD and its endotypes.

Matching journals

The top 15 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.