MOTIVATION: Various studies have shown that cancer tissue samples can be successfully detected and classified by their gene expression patterns using machine learning approaches. One of the challenges in applying these techniques for classifying gene expression data is to extract accurate, readily interpretable rules providing biological insight as to how classification is performed. Current methods generate classifiers that are accurate but difficult to interpret. This is the trade-off between credibility and comprehensibility of the classifiers. Here, we introduce a new classifier in order to address these problems. It is referred to as k-TSP (k-Top Scoring Pairs) and is based on the concept of 'relative expression reversals'. This method generates simple and accurate decision rules that only involve a small number of gene-to-gene expression comparisons, thereby facilitating follow-up studies. RESULTS: In this study, we have compared our approach to other machine learning techniques for class prediction in 19 binary and multi-class gene expression datasets involving human cancers. The k-TSP classifier performs as efficiently as Prediction Analysis of Microarray and support vector machine, and outperforms other learning methods (decision trees, k-nearest neighbour and naïve Bayes). Our approach is easy to interpret as the classifier involves only a small number of informative genes. For these reasons, we consider the k-TSP method to be a useful tool for cancer classification from microarray gene expression data. AVAILABILITY: The software and datasets are available at http://www.ccbm.jhu.edu CONTACT: actan@jhu.edu.
MOTIVATION: Various studies have shown that cancer tissue samples can be successfully detected and classified by their gene expression patterns using machine learning approaches. One of the challenges in applying these techniques for classifying gene expression data is to extract accurate, readily interpretable rules providing biological insight as to how classification is performed. Current methods generate classifiers that are accurate but difficult to interpret. This is the trade-off between credibility and comprehensibility of the classifiers. Here, we introduce a new classifier in order to address these problems. It is referred to as k-TSP (k-Top Scoring Pairs) and is based on the concept of 'relative expression reversals'. This method generates simple and accurate decision rules that only involve a small number of gene-to-gene expression comparisons, thereby facilitating follow-up studies. RESULTS: In this study, we have compared our approach to other machine learning techniques for class prediction in 19 binary and multi-class gene expression datasets involving humancancers. The k-TSP classifier performs as efficiently as Prediction Analysis of Microarray and support vector machine, and outperforms other learning methods (decision trees, k-nearest neighbour and naïve Bayes). Our approach is easy to interpret as the classifier involves only a small number of informative genes. For these reasons, we consider the k-TSP method to be a useful tool for cancer classification from microarray gene expression data. AVAILABILITY: The software and datasets are available at http://www.ccbm.jhu.edu CONTACT: actan@jhu.edu.
Authors: Margaret A Shipp; Ken N Ross; Pablo Tamayo; Andrew P Weng; Jeffery L Kutok; Ricardo C T Aguiar; Michelle Gaasenbeek; Michael Angelo; Michael Reich; Geraldine S Pinkus; Tane S Ray; Margaret A Koval; Kim W Last; Andrew Norton; T Andrew Lister; Jill Mesirov; Donna S Neuberg; Eric S Lander; Jon C Aster; Todd R Golub Journal: Nat Med Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: S Ramaswamy; P Tamayo; R Rifkin; S Mukherjee; C H Yeang; M Angelo; C Ladd; M Reich; E Latulippe; J P Mesirov; T Poggio; W Gerald; M Loda; E S Lander; T R Golub Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-12-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: U Alon; N Barkai; D A Notterman; K Gish; S Ybarra; D Mack; A J Levine Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1999-06-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: A Bhattacharjee; W G Richards; J Staunton; C Li; S Monti; P Vasa; C Ladd; J Beheshti; R Bueno; M Gillette; M Loda; G Weber; E J Mark; E S Lander; W Wong; B E Johnson; T R Golub; D J Sugarbaker; M Meyerson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-11-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: A I Su; J B Welsh; L M Sapinoso; S G Kern; P Dimitrov; H Lapp; P G Schultz; S M Powell; C A Moskaluk; H F Frierson; G M Hampton Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-10-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: I D Bernstein; J W Singer; F O Smith; R G Andrews; D A Flowers; J Petersens; L Steinmann; V Najfeld; D Savage; S Fruchtman Journal: Blood Date: 1992-04-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Dinesh Singh; Phillip G Febbo; Kenneth Ross; Donald G Jackson; Judith Manola; Christine Ladd; Pablo Tamayo; Andrew A Renshaw; Anthony V D'Amico; Jerome P Richie; Eric S Lander; Massimo Loda; Philip W Kantoff; Todd R Golub; William R Sellers Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: J D Griffin; R J Mayer; H J Weinstein; D S Rosenthal; F S Coral; R P Beveridge; S F Schlossman Journal: Blood Date: 1983-09 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: John J Tentler; Sujatha Nallapareddy; Aik Choon Tan; Anna Spreafico; Todd M Pitts; M Pia Morelli; Heather M Selby; Maria I Kachaeva; Sara A Flanigan; Gillian N Kulikowski; Stephen Leong; John J Arcaroli; Wells A Messersmith; S Gail Eckhardt Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Todd M Pitts; Aik Choon Tan; Gillian N Kulikowski; John J Tentler; Amy M Brown; Sara A Flanigan; Stephen Leong; Christopher D Coldren; Fred R Hirsch; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Christopher Korch; S Gail Eckhardt Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 12.531