Centralizing neurofibromatosis experimental tool knowledge with the NF Research Tools Database.

Experimental tools and resources, such as animal models, cell lines, antibodies, genetic reagents and biobanks, are key ingredients in biomedical research. Investigators face multiple challenges when trying to understand the availability, applicability and accessibility of these tools. A major challenge is keeping up with current information about the numerous tools available for a particular research problem. A variety of disease-agnostic projects such as the Mouse Genome Informatics database and the Resource Identification Initiative curate a number of types of research tools. Here, we describe our efforts to build upon these resources to develop a disease-specific research tool resource for the neurofibromatosis (NF) research community. This resource, the NF Research Tools Database, is an open-access database that enables the exploration and discovery of information about NF type 1-relevant animal models, cell lines, antibodies, genetic reagents and biobanks. Users can search and explore tools, obtain detailed information about each tool as well as read and contribute their observations about the performance, reliability and characteristics of tools in the database. NF researchers will be able to use the NF Research Tools Database to promote, discover, share, reuse and characterize research tools, with the goal of advancing NF research. Database URL: https://tools.nf.synapse.org/.

Evaluation of Combined Artificial Intelligence and Radiologist Assessment to Interpret Screening Mammograms.

Importance: Mammography screening currently relies on subjective human interpretation. Artificial intelligence (AI) advances could be used to increase mammography screening accuracy by reducing missed cancers and false positives. Objective: To evaluate whether AI can overcome human mammography interpretation limitations with a rigorous, unbiased evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this diagnostic accuracy study conducted between September 2016 and November 2017, an international, crowdsourced challenge was hosted to foster AI algorithm development focused on interpreting screening mammography. More than 1100 participants comprising 126 teams from 44 countries participated. Analysis began November 18, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measurements: Algorithms used images alone (challenge 1) or combined images, previous examinations (if available), and clinical and demographic risk factor data (challenge 2) and output a score that translated to cancer yes/no within 12 months. Algorithm accuracy for breast cancer detection was evaluated using area under the curve and algorithm specificity compared with radiologists' specificity with radiologists' sensitivity set at 85.9% (United States) and 83.9% (Sweden). An ensemble method aggregating top-performing AI algorithms and radiologists' recall assessment was developed and evaluated. Results: Overall, 144 231 screening mammograms from 85 580 US women (952 cancer positive ≤12 months from screening) were used for algorithm training and validation. A second independent validation cohort included 166 578 examinations from 68 008 Swedish women (780 cancer positive). The top-performing algorithm achieved an area under the curve of 0.858 (United States) and 0.903 (Sweden) and 66.2% (United States) and 81.2% (Sweden) specificity at the radiologists' sensitivity, lower than community-practice radiologists' specificity of 90.5% (United States) and 98.5% (Sweden). Combining top-performing algorithms and US radiologist assessments resulted in a higher area under the curve of 0.942 and achieved a significantly improved specificity (92.0%) at the same sensitivity. Conclusions and Relevance: While no single AI algorithm outperformed radiologists, an ensemble of AI algorithms combined with radiologist assessment in a single-reader screening environment improved overall accuracy. This study underscores the potential of using machine learning methods for enhancing mammography screening interpretation.

A Community Challenge for Inferring Genetic Predictors of Gene Essentialities through Analysis of a Functional Screen of Cancer Cell Lines.

We report the results of a DREAM challenge designed to predict relative genetic essentialities based on a novel dataset testing 98,000 shRNAs against 149 molecularly characterized cancer cell lines. We analyzed the results of over 3,000 submissions over a period of 4 months. We found that algorithms combining essentiality data across multiple genes demonstrated increased accuracy; gene expression was the most informative molecular data type; the identity of the gene being predicted was far more important than the modeling strategy; well-predicted genes and selected molecular features showed enrichment in functional categories; and frequently selected expression features correlated with survival in primary tumors. This study establishes benchmarks for gene essentiality prediction, presents a community resource for future comparison with this benchmark, and provides insights into factors influencing the ability to predict gene essentiality from functional genetic screens. This study also demonstrates the value of releasing pre-publication data publicly to engage the community in an open research collaboration.

Crowdsourced assessment of common genetic contribution to predicting anti-TNF treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects millions world-wide. While anti-TNF treatment is widely used to reduce disease progression, treatment fails in ∼one-third of patients. No biomarker currently exists that identifies non-responders before treatment. A rigorous community-based assessment of the utility of SNP data for predicting anti-TNF treatment efficacy in RA patients was performed in the context of a DREAM Challenge (http://www.synapse.org/RA_Challenge). An open challenge framework enabled the comparative evaluation of predictions developed by 73 research groups using the most comprehensive available data and covering a wide range of state-of-the-art modelling methodologies. Despite a significant genetic heritability estimate of treatment non-response trait (h(2)=0.18, P value=0.02), no significant genetic contribution to prediction accuracy is observed. Results formally confirm the expectations of the rheumatology community that SNP information does not significantly improve predictive performance relative to standard clinical traits, thereby justifying a refocusing of future efforts on collection of other data.

Systematic analysis of challenge-driven improvements in molecular prognostic models for breast cancer.

Although molecular prognostics in breast cancer are among the most successful examples of translating genomic analysis to clinical applications, optimal approaches to breast cancer clinical risk prediction remain controversial. The Sage Bionetworks-DREAM Breast Cancer Prognosis Challenge (BCC) is a crowdsourced research study for breast cancer prognostic modeling using genome-scale data. The BCC provided a community of data analysts with a common platform for data access and blinded evaluation of model accuracy in predicting breast cancer survival on the basis of gene expression data, copy number data, and clinical covariates. This approach offered the opportunity to assess whether a crowdsourced community Challenge would generate models of breast cancer prognosis commensurate with or exceeding current best-in-class approaches. The BCC comprised multiple rounds of blinded evaluations on held-out portions of data on 1981 patients, resulting in more than 1400 models submitted as open source code. Participants then retrained their models on the full data set of 1981 samples and submitted up to five models for validation in a newly generated data set of 184 breast cancer patients. Analysis of the BCC results suggests that the best-performing modeling strategy outperformed previously reported methods in blinded evaluations; model performance was consistent across several independent evaluations; and aggregating community-developed models achieved performance on par with the best-performing individual models.

Noise sampling method: an ANOVA approach allowing robust selection of differentially regulated genes measured by DNA microarrays.

MOTIVATION: A crucial step in microarray data analysis is the selection of subsets of interesting genes from the initial set of genes. In many cases, especially when comparing a specific condition to a reference, the genes of interest are those which are differentially expressed. Two common methods for gene selection are: (a) selection by fold difference (at least n fold variation) and (b) selection by altered ratio (at least n standard deviations away from the mean ratio). RESULTS: The novel method proposed here is based on ANOVA and uses replicate spots to estimate an empirical distribution of the noise. The measured intensity range is divided in a number of intervals. A noise distribution is constructed for each such interval. Bootstrapping is used to map the desired confidence levels from the noise distribution corresponding to a given interval to the measured log ratios in that interval. If the method is applied on individual arrays having replicate spots, the method can calculate an overall width of the noise distribution which can be used as an indicator of the array quality. We compared this method with the fold change and unusual ratio method. We also discuss the relationship with an ANOVA model proposed by Churchill et al. In silico experiments were performed while controlling the degree of regulation as well as the amount of noise. Such experiments show the performance of the classical methods can be very unsatisfactory. We also compared the results of the 2-fold method with the results of the noise sampling method using pre and post immortalization cell lines derived from the MDAH041 fibroblasts hybridized on Affymetrix GeneChip arrays. The 2-fold method reported 198 genes as upregulated and 493 genes as downregulated. The noise sampling method reported 98 gene upregulated and 240 genes downregulated at the 99.99% confidence level. The methods agreed on 221 genes downregulated and 66 genes upregulated. Fourteen genes from the subset of genes reported by both methods were all confirmed by Q-RT-PCR. Alternative assays on various subsets of genes on which the two methods disagreed suggested that the noise sampling method is likely to provide fewer false positives.