IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0204425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An improved machine learning pipeline for urinary volatiles disease detection: Diagnosing diabetes

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea S Martinez-Vernon
  • James A Covington
  • Ramesh P Arasaradnam
  • Siavash Esfahani
  • Nicola O’Connell
  • Ioannis Kyrou
  • Richard S Savage

Abstract

Motivation: The measurement of disease biomarkers in easily–obtained bodily fluids has opened the door to a new type of non–invasive medical diagnostics. New technologies are being developed and fine–tuned in order to make this possibility a reality. One such technology is Field Asymmetric Ion Mobility Spectrometry (FAIMS), which allows the measurement of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in biological samples such as urine. These VOCs are known to contain a range of information on the relevant person’s metabolism and can in principle be used for disease diagnostic purposes. Key to the effective use of such data are well–developed data processing pipelines, which are necessary to extract the most useful data from the complex underlying biological structure. Results: In this study, we present a new data analysis pipeline for FAIMS data, and demonstrate a number of improvements over previously used methods. We evaluate the effect of a series of candidate operational steps during data processing, such as the use of wavelet transforms, principal component analysis (PCA), and classifier ensembles. We also demonstrate the use of FAIMS data in our pipeline to diagnose diabetes on the basis of a simple urine sample using machine learning classifiers. We present results for data generated from a case-control study of 115 urine samples, collected from 72 type II diabetic patients, with 43 healthy volunteers as negative controls. The resulting pipeline combines the steps that resulted in the best classification model performance. These include the use of a two–dimensional discrete wavelet transform, and the Wilcoxon rank–sum test for feature selection. We are able to achieve a best ROC curve AUC of 0.825 (0.747–0.9, 95% CI) for classification of diabetes vs control. We also note that this result is robust to changes in the data pipeline and different analysis runs, with AUC > 0.80 achieved in a range of cases. This is a substantial improvement in performance over previously used data processing methods in this area. Our ability to make strong statements about FAIMS ability to diagnose diabetes is sadly limited, as we found confounding effects from the demographics when including these data in the pipeline. The demographics alone produced a best AUC of 0.87 (0.795–0.94, 95% CI). While the combination of the demographics and FAIMS data resulted in an improvement on the AUC (0.907; 0.848–0.97, 95% CI), it did not prove to be a significant difference. Nevertheless, the pipeline itself shows a significant improvement in performance over more basic methods which have been used with FAIMS data in the past.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea S Martinez-Vernon & James A Covington & Ramesh P Arasaradnam & Siavash Esfahani & Nicola O’Connell & Ioannis Kyrou & Richard S Savage, 2018. "An improved machine learning pipeline for urinary volatiles disease detection: Diagnosing diabetes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0204425
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0204425
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0204425&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0204425?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friedman, Jerome H. & Hastie, Trevor & Tibshirani, Rob, 2010. "Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i01).
    2. Karatzoglou, Alexandros & Smola, Alexandros & Hornik, Kurt & Zeileis, Achim, 2004. "kernlab - An S4 Package for Kernel Methods in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 11(i09).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bellotti, Anthony & Brigo, Damiano & Gambetti, Paolo & Vrins, Frédéric, 2021. "Forecasting recovery rates on non-performing loans with machine learning," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 428-444.
    2. Maria-Carmen García-Centeno & Román Mínguez-Salido & Raúl del Pozo-Rubio, 2021. "The Classification of Profiles of Financial Catastrophe Caused by Out-of-Pocket Payments: A Methodological Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Anna Hake & Nico Pfeifer, 2017. "Prediction of HIV-1 sensitivity to broadly neutralizing antibodies shows a trend towards resistance over time," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Fitzpatrick, Trevor & Mues, Christophe, 2021. "How can lenders prosper? Comparing machine learning approaches to identify profitable peer-to-peer loan investments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 711-722.
    5. Rachel Sippy & Daniel F Farrell & Daniel A Lichtenstein & Ryan Nightingale & Megan A Harris & Joseph Toth & Paris Hantztidiamantis & Nicholas Usher & Cinthya Cueva Aponte & Julio Barzallo Aguilar & An, 2020. "Severity Index for Suspected Arbovirus (SISA): Machine learning for accurate prediction of hospitalization in subjects suspected of arboviral infection," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Guanhua Chen & Donglin Zeng & Michael R. Kosorok, 2016. "Personalized Dose Finding Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(516), pages 1509-1521, October.
    7. Lili Tan & Yunzhan Gong & Yawen Wang, 2019. "A Model for Predicting Statement Mutation Scores," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-39, August.
    8. Yli-Heikkilä, Maria & Tauriainen, Jukka, 2014. "Profitability prediction model for dairy farms using the random forest method," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182846, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Tutz, Gerhard & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Uhlmann, Lorenz, 2015. "Variable selection in general multinomial logit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 207-222.
    10. Ernesto Carrella & Richard M. Bailey & Jens Koed Madsen, 2018. "Indirect inference through prediction," Papers 1807.01579, arXiv.org.
    11. Tsukioka, Yasutomo & Yanagi, Junya & Takada, Teruko, 2018. "Investor sentiment extracted from internet stock message boards and IPO puzzles," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 205-217.
    12. Rui Wang & Naihua Xiu & Kim-Chuan Toh, 2021. "Subspace quadratic regularization method for group sparse multinomial logistic regression," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 531-559, July.
    13. Mkhadri, Abdallah & Ouhourane, Mohamed, 2013. "An extended variable inclusion and shrinkage algorithm for correlated variables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 631-644.
    14. Masakazu Higuchi & Mitsuteru Nakamura & Shuji Shinohara & Yasuhiro Omiya & Takeshi Takano & Daisuke Mizuguchi & Noriaki Sonota & Hiroyuki Toda & Taku Saito & Mirai So & Eiji Takayama & Hiroo Terashi &, 2022. "Detection of Major Depressive Disorder Based on a Combination of Voice Features: An Exploratory Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    16. Vincent, Martin & Hansen, Niels Richard, 2014. "Sparse group lasso and high dimensional multinomial classification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 771-786.
    17. Chen, Le-Yu & Lee, Sokbae, 2018. "Best subset binary prediction," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 39-56.
    18. Perrot-Dockès Marie & Lévy-Leduc Céline & Chiquet Julien & Sansonnet Laure & Brégère Margaux & Étienne Marie-Pierre & Robin Stéphane & Genta-Jouve Grégory, 2018. "A variable selection approach in the multivariate linear model: an application to LC-MS metabolomics data," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, October.
    19. Fan, Jianqing & Jiang, Bai & Sun, Qiang, 2022. "Bayesian factor-adjusted sparse regression," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 230(1), pages 3-19.
    20. Jun Li & Serguei Netessine & Sergei Koulayev, 2018. "Price to Compete … with Many: How to Identify Price Competition in High-Dimensional Space," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4118-4136, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0204425. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.