A novel pathogenic mitochondrial DNA variant m.4344T>C in tRNAGln causes developmental delay.

Mitochondrial diseases are a group of genetic diseases caused by mutations in mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA. However, the genetic spectrum of this disease is not yet complete. In this study, we identified a novel variant m.4344T>C in mitochondrial tRNAGln from a patient with developmental delay. The mutant loads of m.4344T>C were 95% and 89% in the patient's blood and oral epithelial cells, respectively. Multialignment analysis showed high evolutionary conservation of this nucleotide. TrRosettaRNA predicted that m.4344T>C variant would introduce an additional hydrogen bond and alter the conformation of the T-loop. The transmitochondrial cybrid-based study demonstrated that m.4344T>C variant impaired the steady-state level of mitochondrial tRNAGln and decreased the contents of mitochondrial OXPHOS complexes I, III, and IV, resulting in defective mitochondrial respiration, elevated mitochondrial ROS production, reduced mitochondrial membrane potential and decreased mitochondrial ATP levels. Altogether, this is the first report in patient carrying the m.4344T>C variant. Our data uncover the pathogenesis of the m.4344T>C variant and expand the genetic mutation spectrum of mitochondrial diseases, thus contributing to the clinical diagnosis of mitochondrial tRNAGln gene variants-associated mitochondrial diseases.

Applying probability calibration to ensemble methods to predict 2-year mortality in patients with DLBCL.

BACKGROUND: Under the influences of chemotherapy regimens, clinical staging, immunologic expressions and other factors, the survival rates of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are different. The accurate prediction of mortality hazards is key to precision medicine, which can help clinicians make optimal therapeutic decisions to extend the survival times of individual patients with DLBCL. Thus, we have developed a predictive model to predict the mortality hazard of DLBCL patients within 2 years of treatment. METHODS: We evaluated 406 patients with DLBCL and collected 17 variables from each patient. The predictive variables were selected by the Cox model, the logistic model and the random forest algorithm. Five classifiers were chosen as the base models for ensemble learning: the naïve Bayes, logistic regression, random forest, support vector machine and feedforward neural network models. We first calibrated the biased outputs from the five base models by using probability calibration methods (including shape-restricted polynomial regression, Platt scaling and isotonic regression). Then, we aggregated the outputs from the various base models to predict the 2-year mortality of DLBCL patients by using three strategies (stacking, simple averaging and weighted averaging). Finally, we assessed model performance over 300 hold-out tests. RESULTS: Gender, stage, IPI, KPS and rituximab were significant factors for predicting the deaths of DLBCL patients within 2 years of treatment. The stacking model that first calibrated the base model by shape-restricted polynomial regression performed best (AUC = 0.820, ECE = 8.983, MCE = 21.265) in all methods. In contrast, the performance of the stacking model without undergoing probability calibration is inferior (AUC = 0.806, ECE = 9.866, MCE = 24.850). In the simple averaging model and weighted averaging model, the prediction error of the ensemble model also decreased with probability calibration. CONCLUSIONS: Among all the methods compared, the proposed model has the lowest prediction error when predicting the 2-year mortality of DLBCL patients. These promising results may indicate that our modeling strategy of applying probability calibration to ensemble learning is successful.

Probability calibration-based prediction of recurrence rate in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Although many patients receive good prognoses with standard therapy, 30-50% of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cases may relapse after treatment. Statistical or computational intelligent models are powerful tools for assessing prognoses; however, many cannot generate accurate risk (probability) estimates. Thus, probability calibration-based versions of traditional machine learning algorithms are developed in this paper to predict the risk of relapse in patients with DLBCL. METHODS: Five machine learning algorithms were assessed, namely, naïve Bayes (NB), logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM) and feedforward neural network (FFNN), and three methods were used to develop probability calibration-based versions of each of the above algorithms, namely, Platt scaling (Platt), isotonic regression (IsoReg) and shape-restricted polynomial regression (RPR). Performance comparisons were based on the average results of the stratified hold-out test, which was repeated 500 times. We used the AUC to evaluate the discrimination ability (i.e., classification ability) of the model and assessed the model calibration (i.e., risk prediction accuracy) using the H-L goodness-of-fit test, ECE, MCE and BS. RESULTS: Sex, stage, IPI, KPS, GCB, CD10 and rituximab were significant factors predicting the 3-year recurrence rate of patients with DLBCL. For the 5 uncalibrated algorithms, the LR (ECE = 8.517, MCE = 20.100, BS = 0.188) and FFNN (ECE = 8.238, MCE = 20.150, BS = 0.184) models were well-calibrated. The errors of the initial risk estimate of the NB (ECE = 15.711, MCE = 34.350, BS = 0.212), RF (ECE = 12.740, MCE = 27.200, BS = 0.201) and SVM (ECE = 9.872, MCE = 23.800, BS = 0.194) models were large. With probability calibration, the biased NB, RF and SVM models were well-corrected. The calibration errors of the LR and FFNN models were not further improved regardless of the probability calibration method. Among the 3 calibration methods, RPR achieved the best calibration for both the RF and SVM models. The power of IsoReg was not obvious for the NB, RF or SVM models. CONCLUSIONS: Although these algorithms all have good classification ability, several cannot generate accurate risk estimates. Probability calibration is an effective method of improving the accuracy of these poorly calibrated algorithms. Our risk model of DLBCL demonstrates good discrimination and calibration ability and has the potential to help clinicians make optimal therapeutic decisions to achieve precision medicine.