Asthma in farm children is more determined by genetic polymorphisms and in non-farm children by environmental factors.

BACKGROUND: The asthma syndrome is influenced by hereditary and environmental factors. With the example of farm exposure, we study whether genetic and environmental factors interact for asthma. METHODS: Statistical learning approaches based on penalized regression and decision trees were used to predict asthma in the GABRIELA study with 850 cases (9% farm children) and 857 controls (14% farm children). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected from a genome-wide dataset based on a literature search or by statistical selection techniques. Prediction was assessed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and validated in the PASTURE cohort. RESULTS: Prediction by family history of asthma and atopy yielded an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.62 [0.57-0.66] in the random forest machine learning approach. By adding information on demographics (sex and age) and 26 environmental exposure variables, the quality of prediction significantly improved (AUC = 0.65 [0.61-0.70]). In farm children, however, environmental variables did not improve prediction quality. Rather SNPs related to IL33 and RAD50 contributed significantly to the prediction of asthma (AUC = 0.70 [0.62-0.78]). CONCLUSIONS: Asthma in farm children is more likely predicted by other factors as compared to non-farm children though in both forms, family history may integrate environmental exposure, genotype and degree of penetrance.

A strategy for high-dimensional multivariable analysis classifies childhood asthma phenotypes from genetic, immunological, and environmental factors.

BACKGROUND: Associations between childhood asthma phenotypes and genetic, immunological, and environmental factors have been previously established. Yet, strategies to integrate high-dimensional risk factors from multiple distinct data sets, and thereby increase the statistical power of analyses, have been hampered by a preponderance of missing data and lack of methods to accommodate them. METHODS: We assembled questionnaire, diagnostic, genotype, microarray, RT-qPCR, flow cytometry, and cytokine data (referred to as data modalities) to use as input factors for a classifier that could distinguish healthy children, mild-to-moderate allergic asthmatics, and nonallergic asthmatics. Based on data from 260 German children aged 4-14 from our university outpatient clinic, we built a novel multilevel prediction approach for asthma outcome which could deal with a present complex missing data structure. RESULTS: The optimal learning method was boosting based on all data sets, achieving an area underneath the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for three classes of phenotypes of 0.81 (95%-confidence interval (CI): 0.65-0.94) using leave-one-out cross-validation. Besides improving the AUC, our integrative multilevel learning approach led to tighter CIs than using smaller complete predictor data sets (AUC = 0.82 [0.66-0.94] for boosting). The most important variables for classifying childhood asthma phenotypes comprised novel identified genes, namely PKN2 (protein kinase N2), PTK2 (protein tyrosine kinase 2), and ALPP (alkaline phosphatase, placental). CONCLUSION: Our combination of several data modalities using a novel strategy improved classification of childhood asthma phenotypes but requires validation in external populations. The generic approach is applicable to other multilevel data-based risk prediction settings, which typically suffer from incomplete data.

Correcting Classifiers for Sample Selection Bias in Two-Phase Case-Control Studies.

Epidemiological studies often utilize stratified data in which rare outcomes or exposures are artificially enriched. This design can increase precision in association tests but distorts predictions when applying classifiers on nonstratified data. Several methods correct for this so-called sample selection bias, but their performance remains unclear especially for machine learning classifiers. With an emphasis on two-phase case-control studies, we aim to assess which corrections to perform in which setting and to obtain methods suitable for machine learning techniques, especially the random forest. We propose two new resampling-based methods to resemble the original data and covariance structure: stochastic inverse-probability oversampling and parametric inverse-probability bagging. We compare all techniques for the random forest and other classifiers, both theoretically and on simulated and real data. Empirical results show that the random forest profits from only the parametric inverse-probability bagging proposed by us. For other classifiers, correction is mostly advantageous, and methods perform uniformly. We discuss consequences of inappropriate distribution assumptions and reason for different behaviors between the random forest and other classifiers. In conclusion, we provide guidance for choosing correction methods when training classifiers on biased samples. For random forests, our method outperforms state-of-the-art procedures if distribution assumptions are roughly fulfilled. We provide our implementation in the R package sambia.