It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Given the complex relationship between gene expression and phenotypic outcomes, computationally efficient approaches are needed to sift through large high-dimensional datasets in order to identify biologically relevant biomarkers. In this report, we describe a method of identifying the most salient biomarker genes in a dataset, which we call “candidate genes”, by evaluating the ability of gene combinations to classify samples from a dataset, which we call “classification potential”. Our algorithm, Gene Oracle, uses a neural network to test user defined gene sets for polygenic classification potential and then uses a combinatorial approach to further decompose selected gene sets into candidate and non-candidate biomarker genes. We tested this algorithm on curated gene sets from the Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB) quantified in RNAseq gene expression matrices obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) data repositories. First, we identified which MSigDB Hallmark subsets have significant classification potential for both the TCGA and GTEx datasets. Then, we identified the most discriminatory candidate biomarker genes in each Hallmark gene set and provide evidence that the improved biomarker potential of these genes may be due to reduced functional complexity.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Clemson University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Clemson, SC, USA
2 Clemson University, Department of Genetics and Biochemistry, Clemson, SC, USA
3 Clemson University, Department of Genetics and Biochemistry, Clemson, SC, USA; Clemson University, Center for Human Genetics, Clemson, SC, USA; Clemson University, Biomedical Data Science and Informatics, Clemson, SC, USA