| Literature DB >> 31126891 |
Kipp W Johnson1, Benjamin S Glicksberg2, Khader Shameer3, Yuliya Vengrenyuk4, Chayakrit Krittanawong5, Adam J Russak6, Samin K Sharma4, Jagat N Narula4, Joel T Dudley1, Annapoorna S Kini7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fibrous cap thickness (FCT), best measured by intravascular optical coherence tomography (OCT), is the most important determinant of plaque rupture in the coronary arteries. Statin treatment increases FCT and thus reduces the likelihood of acute coronary events. However, substantial statin-related FCT increase occurs in only a subset of patients. Currently, there are no methods to predict which patients will benefit. We use transcriptomic data from a clinical trial of rosuvastatin to predict if a patient's FCT will increase in response to statin therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Optical coherence tomography; Personalized medicine; Predictive modeling; Statin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31126891 PMCID: PMC6607084 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.05.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EBioMedicine ISSN: 2352-3964 Impact factor: 8.143
Fig. 1Central figure illustrating the components of study. (a) An example OCT image of an atherosclerotic plaque, before and after 8–12 weeks of high intensity rosuvastatin therapy. (b) The study workflow. Blood transcriptomics and OCT imaging were performed at 69 patients at baseline and follow-up periods. 35 patients had increased FCT (responders), and 34 patients did not (non-responders). (c) Predictive modeling of FCT response. We combined clinical variables and transcriptomic data and used two machine learning methods to predict responder type. (d) Graphical explanation of extensive sensitivity testing. We iteratively performed the strategy depicted in panel (c) upon randomly selected subsets of our dataset in order to understand the variability of the results.
Clinical variables of individuals in dataset, stratified by Responder/Non-responder type.
| Non-responder | Responder | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | ||
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 9 (26.5%) | 13 (37.1%) | 22 (31.9%) | 0.489 |
| Male | 25 (73.5%) | 22 (62.9%) | 47 (68.1%) | |
| Age at event (Years) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 67.1 (9.58) | 62.9 (11.2) | 65.0 (10.6) | 0.11 |
| Weight (kg) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 87.3 (17.0) | 79.0 (13.6) | 83.1 (15.8) | 0.03 |
| Smoking | ||||
| Current/Former | 16 (47.1%) | 15 (42.9%) | 31 (44.9%) | 0.913 |
| Never | 18 (52.9%) | 20 (57.1%) | 38 (55.1%) | |
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 145 (22.2) | 137 (24.8) | 141 (23.7) | 0.17 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 73.3 (12.6) | 69.5 (10.2) | 71.4 (11.5) | 0.17 |
| Total Cholesterol (mg/dL) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 147 (42.0) | 146 (35.6) | 147 (38.6) | 0.93 |
| HDL Cholesterol (mg/dL) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 39.9 (10.6) | 41.9 (13.9) | 40.9 (12.3) | 0.52 |
| LDL Cholesterol (mg/dL) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 83.3 (39.6) | 80.8 (32.3) | 82.1 (35.8) | 0.78 |
| Hemoglobin A1c (%) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 7.06 (1.39) | 6.80 (1.58) | 6.93 (1.48) | 0.48 |
| hs-CRP (mg/L) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 3.42 (0.643) | 3.52 (0.522) | 3.47 (0.582) | 0.48 |
P values for continuous variables computed with the two-sample t-test. P values for categorical variables computed with the Chi-square test of independence.
Fig. 2Predictive Model Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for the elastic net and K top scoring pairs predictive models are shown in (a). ROC scores were computed for KTSP by dividing the number of votes by number of potential votes (i.e. gene pairs) in the classifier as the predicted probability. Sensitivity testing using elastic net (b) and KTSP (c) showed performance is highly robust to sampling error.
Fig. 3Heatmap of 18 Genes Selected by K-Top-Scoring-Pairs Algorithm (KTSP). Patient samples and genes were grouped using hierarchical clustering. Gene expression values were normalized for plotting by dividing the gene's microarray signal intensity minus the mean signal intensity for that gene by the standard deviation of signal intensity for that gene (Z score).
Elastic Net covariates.
| Covariate | Coefficient | Covariate | Coefficient | Covariate | Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | −90.652 | ZSCAN12L1 | −0.047 | WDR23 | 0.322 |
| RNF113A | −1.155 | GSDM1 | −0.045 | CBX5 | 0.365 |
| MEI1 | −1.042 | RNU6–15 | −0.041 | XRCC5 | 0.397 |
| PBX2 | −0.711 | DTX3L | −0.026 | EIF2A | 0.401 |
| STARD5 | −0.587 | SPATA13 | 0.006 | NOL7 | 0.424 |
| TIMM17B | −0.568 | HSPH1 | 0.012 | FMO2 | 0.477 |
| RNU4ATAC | −0.557 | CLK1 | 0.016 | C6ORF27 | 0.496 |
| FICD | −0.455 | SMAP1 | 0.089 | MEF2A | 0.549 |
| HCST | −0.408 | TINP1 | 0.104 | CSE1L | 0.577 |
| CALB2 | −0.401 | TMEM189-UBE2V1 | 0.112 | SNORD57 | 0.633 |
| TP53TG1 | −0.399 | SLC46A3 | 0.118 | HSPA9 | 0.635 |
| DHX37 | −0.393 | KIAA0020 | 0.118 | AQP12B | 0.656 |
| USP48 | −0.393 | PPP3CB | 0.126 | TMEM183A | 0.661 |
| FOXO4 | −0.299 | XCR1 | 0.13 | TAOK1 | 0.73 |
| HNRNPUL2 | −0.29 | UBE2D3 | 0.148 | C14ORF68 | 0.74 |
| MRPS16 | −0.268 | CXORF38 | 0.157 | CREBBP | 0.801 |
| MT1G | −0.26 | C19ORF12 | 0.181 | SFRS2 | 0.829 |
| RNU6-1 | −0.222 | NR2C2 | 0.204 | MBNL3 | 0.837 |
| AURKAIP1 | −0.204 | SR140 | 0.223 | YARS2 | 0.878 |
| FNIP2 | −0.133 | GTF2A1 | 0.236 | CLN6 | 0.981 |
| UBE2B | −0.129 | ZRANB2 | 0.236 | RBAK | 1.012 |
| SLC39A3 | −0.108 | SEC31A | 0.253 | KCTD7 | 1.069 |
| LOC148413 | −0.074 | ZKSCAN1 | 0.273 | LOC729402 | 1.118 |
| AKR1D1 | −0.066 | TP53RK | 0.307 | IRX6 | 2.525 |
| ZNF264 | −0.053 | GNL2 | 0.313 |
K Top-Scoring Pairs (KTSP) Gene Pairs.
| Gene Pair | Score |
|---|---|
| TAOK1, MEI1 | 0.884 |
| ZRANB2, PMPCA | 0.884 |
| GNL2, AP1M1 | 0.884 |
| PPIG, PBX2 | 0.855 |
| ATOH7, RBAK | 0.826 |
| LOC729402, CALB2 | 0.797 |
| CXORF38, TNPO2 | 0.797 |
| TIMM17B, OSBPL8 | 0.796 |
| TP53TG1, SNORD57 | 0.796 |
Fig. 4Genes Shared Between Elastic Net and KTSP predictive models. Venn diagram showing the overlap of genes included in the elastic net and KTSP algorithms. 12 of 18 KTSP genes were also selected by the elastic net algorithm.