Enhancing HLA-B27 antigen detection: Leveraging machine learning algorithms for flow cytometric analysis.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Sándor Baráth, Parvind Singh, Zsuzsanna Hevessy, Anikó Ujfalusi, Zoltán Mezei, Mária Balogh, Marianna Száraz Széles, János Kappelmayer
{"title":"Enhancing HLA-B27 antigen detection: Leveraging machine learning algorithms for flow cytometric analysis.","authors":"Sándor Baráth, Parvind Singh, Zsuzsanna Hevessy, Anikó Ujfalusi, Zoltán Mezei, Mária Balogh, Marianna Száraz Széles, János Kappelmayer","doi":"10.1002/cyto.b.22164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the association of human leukocyte antigen B27 (HLA-B27) with spondylarthropathies is widely known, HLA-B27 antigen expression is frequently identified using flow cytometric or other techniques. Because of the possibility of cross-reaction with off target antigens, such as HLA-B7, each flow cytometric technique applies a \"gray zone\" reserved for equivocal findings. Our aim was to use machine learning (ML) methods to classify such equivocal data as positive or negative. Equivocal samples (n = 99) were selected from samples submitted to our institution for clinical evaluation by HLA-B27 antigen testing. Samples were analyzed by flow cytometry and polymerase chain reaction. Features of histograms generated by flow cytometry were used to train and validate ML methods for classification as logistic regression (LR), decision tree (DT), random forest (RF) and light gradient boost method (GBM). All evaluated ML algorithms performed well, with high accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, as well as negative and positive predictive values. Although, gradient boost approaches are proposed as high performance methods; nevertheless, their effectiveness may be lower for smaller sample sizes. On our relatively smaller sample set, the random forest algorithm performed best (AUC: 0.92), but there was no statistically significant difference between the ML algorithms used. AUC values for light GBM, DT, and LR were 0.88, 0.89, 0.89, respectively. Implementing these algorithms into the process of HLA-B27 testing can reduce the number of uncertain, false negative or false positive cases, especially in laboratories where no genetic testing is available.</p>","PeriodicalId":10883,"journal":{"name":"Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.b.22164","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the association of human leukocyte antigen B27 (HLA-B27) with spondylarthropathies is widely known, HLA-B27 antigen expression is frequently identified using flow cytometric or other techniques. Because of the possibility of cross-reaction with off target antigens, such as HLA-B7, each flow cytometric technique applies a "gray zone" reserved for equivocal findings. Our aim was to use machine learning (ML) methods to classify such equivocal data as positive or negative. Equivocal samples (n = 99) were selected from samples submitted to our institution for clinical evaluation by HLA-B27 antigen testing. Samples were analyzed by flow cytometry and polymerase chain reaction. Features of histograms generated by flow cytometry were used to train and validate ML methods for classification as logistic regression (LR), decision tree (DT), random forest (RF) and light gradient boost method (GBM). All evaluated ML algorithms performed well, with high accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, as well as negative and positive predictive values. Although, gradient boost approaches are proposed as high performance methods; nevertheless, their effectiveness may be lower for smaller sample sizes. On our relatively smaller sample set, the random forest algorithm performed best (AUC: 0.92), but there was no statistically significant difference between the ML algorithms used. AUC values for light GBM, DT, and LR were 0.88, 0.89, 0.89, respectively. Implementing these algorithms into the process of HLA-B27 testing can reduce the number of uncertain, false negative or false positive cases, especially in laboratories where no genetic testing is available.

加强 HLA-B27 抗原检测:利用机器学习算法进行流式细胞分析。
由于人类白细胞抗原 B27(HLA-B27)与脊柱关节病的关系已广为人知,HLA-B27 抗原的表达经常使用流式细胞术或其他技术进行鉴定。由于可能与非目标抗原(如 HLA-B7)发生交叉反应,每种流式细胞技术都为模棱两可的结果预留了一个 "灰色区域"。我们的目的是使用机器学习(ML)方法将这类等位数据分为阳性和阴性。等位样本(n = 99)选自提交给本机构进行 HLA-B27 抗原检测临床评估的样本。样本通过流式细胞术和聚合酶链反应进行分析。流式细胞仪生成的直方图特征被用于训练和验证逻辑回归(LR)、决策树(DT)、随机森林(RF)和光梯度提升法(GBM)等 ML 分类方法。所有评估的 ML 算法都表现良好,具有较高的准确性、灵敏度、特异性以及阴性和阳性预测值。虽然梯度提升法被认为是高性能的方法,但在样本量较小的情况下,其有效性可能较低。在我们相对较小的样本集上,随机森林算法表现最佳(AUC:0.92),但所使用的 ML 算法之间没有显著的统计学差异。轻度 GBM、DT 和 LR 的 AUC 值分别为 0.88、0.89 和 0.89。在 HLA-B27 检测过程中采用这些算法可以减少不确定、假阴性或假阳性病例的数量,尤其是在没有基因检测的实验室中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
32.40%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry features original research reports, in-depth reviews and special issues that directly relate to and palpably impact clinical flow, mass and image-based cytometry. These may include clinical and translational investigations important in the diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic management of patients. Thus, we welcome research papers from various disciplines related [but not limited to] hematopathologists, hematologists, immunologists and cell biologists with clinically relevant and innovative studies investigating individual-cell analytics and/or separations. In addition to the types of papers indicated above, we also welcome Letters to the Editor, describing case reports or important medical or technical topics relevant to our readership without the length and depth of a full original report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信