Literature DB >> 29407288

GWAS-based machine learning approach to predict duloxetine response in major depressive disorder.

Malgorzata Maciukiewicz1, Victoria S Marshe2, Anne-Christin Hauschild3, Jane A Foster4, Susan Rotzinger5, James L Kennedy6, Sidney H Kennedy7, Daniel J Müller8, Joseph Geraci9.   

Abstract

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders and is commonly treated with antidepressant drugs. However, large variability is observed in terms of response to antidepressants. Machine learning (ML) models may be useful to predict treatment outcomes. A sample of 186 MDD patients received treatment with duloxetine for up to 8 weeks were categorized as "responders" based on a MADRS change >50% from baseline; or "remitters" based on a MADRS score ≤10 at end point. The initial dataset (N = 186) was randomly divided into training and test sets in a nested 5-fold cross-validation, where 80% was used as a training set and 20% made up five independent test sets. We performed genome-wide logistic regression to identify potentially significant variants related to duloxetine response/remission and extracted the most promising predictors using LASSO regression. Subsequently, classification-regression trees (CRT) and support vector machines (SVM) were applied to construct models, using ten-fold cross-validation. With regards to response, none of the pairs performed significantly better than chance (accuracy p > .1). For remission, SVM achieved moderate performance with an accuracy = 0.52, a sensitivity = 0.58, and a specificity = 0.46, and 0.51 for all coefficients for CRT. The best performing SVM fold was characterized by an accuracy = 0.66 (p = .071), sensitivity = 0.70 and a sensitivity = 0.61. In this study, the potential of using GWAS data to predict duloxetine outcomes was examined using ML models. The models were characterized by a promising sensitivity, but specificity remained moderate at best. The inclusion of additional non-genetic variables to create integrated models may improve prediction.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29407288     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.12.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 0022-3956            Impact factor:   4.791


  11 in total

1.  Pharmacogenetics and Depression: A Critical Perspective.

Authors:  Filippo Corponi; Chiara Fabbri; Alessandro Serretti
Journal:  Psychiatry Investig       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 2.505

Review 2.  Exploring the new horizons of drug repurposing: A vital tool for turning hard work into smart work.

Authors:  Rajesh Kumar; Seetha Harilal; Sheeba Varghese Gupta; Jobin Jose; Della Grace Thomas Parambi; Md Sahab Uddin; Muhammad Ajmal Shah; Bijo Mathew
Journal:  Eur J Med Chem       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 6.514

3.  Prediction of Smoking Behavior From Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms With Machine Learning Approaches.

Authors:  Yi Xu; Liyu Cao; Xinyi Zhao; Yinghao Yao; Qiang Liu; Bin Zhang; Yan Wang; Ying Mao; Yunlong Ma; Jennie Z Ma; Thomas J Payne; Ming D Li; Lanjuan Li
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 4.157

Review 4.  Reaching the End-Game for GWAS: Machine Learning Approaches for the Prioritization of Complex Disease Loci.

Authors:  Hannah L Nicholls; Christopher R John; David S Watson; Patricia B Munroe; Michael R Barnes; Claudia P Cabrera
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 5.  Challenges and Future Prospects of Precision Medicine in Psychiatry.

Authors:  Mirko Manchia; Claudia Pisanu; Alessio Squassina; Bernardo Carpiniello
Journal:  Pharmgenomics Pers Med       Date:  2020-04-23

Review 6.  Precision Psychiatry Applications with Pharmacogenomics: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Approaches.

Authors:  Eugene Lin; Chieh-Hsin Lin; Hsien-Yuan Lane
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 5.923

7.  Improving predictive models for Alzheimer's disease using GWAS data by incorporating misclassified samples modeling.

Authors:  Brissa-Lizbeth Romero-Rosales; Jose-Gerardo Tamez-Pena; Humberto Nicolini; Maria-Guadalupe Moreno-Treviño; Victor Trevino
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Multi-omics driven predictions of response to acute phase combination antidepressant therapy: a machine learning approach with cross-trial replication.

Authors:  Jeremiah B Joyce; Caroline W Grant; Duan Liu; Siamak MahmoudianDehkordi; Rima Kaddurah-Daouk; Michelle Skime; Joanna Biernacka; Mark A Frye; Taryn Mayes; Thomas Carmody; Paul E Croarkin; Liewei Wang; Richard Weinshilboum; William V Bobo; Madhukar H Trivedi; Arjun P Athreya
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2021-10-07       Impact factor: 7.989

9.  A Deep Learning Approach for Predicting Antidepressant Response in Major Depression Using Clinical and Genetic Biomarkers.

Authors:  Eugene Lin; Po-Hsiu Kuo; Yu-Li Liu; Younger W-Y Yu; Albert C Yang; Shih-Jen Tsai
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 4.157

10.  Implementing Precision Psychiatry: A Systematic Review of Individualized Prediction Models for Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo; Erich Studerus; Julio Vaquerizo-Serrano; Jessica Irving; Ana Catalan; Dominic Oliver; Helen Baldwin; Andrea Danese; Seena Fazel; Ewout W Steyerberg; Daniel Stahl; Paolo Fusar-Poli
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 9.306

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.