Max Shpak, Eric Parfitt, Soroush Mahmoudiandehkordi, Mehdi Maadooliat, Steven J Schrodi
{"title":"Evaluating genetic-based disease prediction approaches through simulation.","authors":"Max Shpak, Eric Parfitt, Soroush Mahmoudiandehkordi, Mehdi Maadooliat, Steven J Schrodi","doi":"10.1007/s00439-025-02798-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Common diseases exhibit substantial heritability, and GWAS of these diseases have revealed hundreds of thousands of high-frequency disease susceptibility variants throughout the genome. These studies offer the prospect of using genomic data to improve disease prediction and diagnosis, however, the relative performance of different predictive modeling approaches is not well-characterized. To investigate this systematically, we constructed a Monte Carlo simulation generating model genomes with 500 SNPs carrying risk alleles that are parameterized by the strength of their effects and by different modes of inheritance—additive, dominant, recessive, and combinations thereof. After generating genotypes for cases and controls, several machine learning classifiers (logistic regression, naïve Bayes, random forests, and neural networks, with and without feature selection) were applied to predict disease phenotypes from genotypes. Each classifier’s error rates were evaluated and compared using AUC. We found that random forest models were the most accurate predictors of disease over the range of inheritance parameters, followed by logistic regression and naïve Bayes, while the feedforward multilayer neural network model had lower AUC. We also investigated the association of AUC with the difference in polygenic risk score (PRS) between disease and control samples by comparing AUC in the simulations to the values predicted from the PRS distributions, finding a monotonic, curvilinear relationship as predicted analytically from odds-risk and liability threshold models. Our results also show that with small risk effects, the odds-risk model provided an accurate estimate of the AUC-PRS association while a liability threshold model performed better when risk alleles had strong effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":13175,"journal":{"name":"Human Genetics","volume":"145 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12823641/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-025-02798-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Common diseases exhibit substantial heritability, and GWAS of these diseases have revealed hundreds of thousands of high-frequency disease susceptibility variants throughout the genome. These studies offer the prospect of using genomic data to improve disease prediction and diagnosis, however, the relative performance of different predictive modeling approaches is not well-characterized. To investigate this systematically, we constructed a Monte Carlo simulation generating model genomes with 500 SNPs carrying risk alleles that are parameterized by the strength of their effects and by different modes of inheritance—additive, dominant, recessive, and combinations thereof. After generating genotypes for cases and controls, several machine learning classifiers (logistic regression, naïve Bayes, random forests, and neural networks, with and without feature selection) were applied to predict disease phenotypes from genotypes. Each classifier’s error rates were evaluated and compared using AUC. We found that random forest models were the most accurate predictors of disease over the range of inheritance parameters, followed by logistic regression and naïve Bayes, while the feedforward multilayer neural network model had lower AUC. We also investigated the association of AUC with the difference in polygenic risk score (PRS) between disease and control samples by comparing AUC in the simulations to the values predicted from the PRS distributions, finding a monotonic, curvilinear relationship as predicted analytically from odds-risk and liability threshold models. Our results also show that with small risk effects, the odds-risk model provided an accurate estimate of the AUC-PRS association while a liability threshold model performed better when risk alleles had strong effects.
期刊介绍:
Human Genetics is a monthly journal publishing original and timely articles on all aspects of human genetics. The Journal particularly welcomes articles in the areas of Behavioral genetics, Bioinformatics, Cancer genetics and genomics, Cytogenetics, Developmental genetics, Disease association studies, Dysmorphology, ELSI (ethical, legal and social issues), Evolutionary genetics, Gene expression, Gene structure and organization, Genetics of complex diseases and epistatic interactions, Genetic epidemiology, Genome biology, Genome structure and organization, Genotype-phenotype relationships, Human Genomics, Immunogenetics and genomics, Linkage analysis and genetic mapping, Methods in Statistical Genetics, Molecular diagnostics, Mutation detection and analysis, Neurogenetics, Physical mapping and Population Genetics. Articles reporting animal models relevant to human biology or disease are also welcome. Preference will be given to those articles which address clinically relevant questions or which provide new insights into human biology.
Unless reporting entirely novel and unusual aspects of a topic, clinical case reports, cytogenetic case reports, papers on descriptive population genetics, articles dealing with the frequency of polymorphisms or additional mutations within genes in which numerous lesions have already been described, and papers that report meta-analyses of previously published datasets will normally not be accepted.
The Journal typically will not consider for publication manuscripts that report merely the isolation, map position, structure, and tissue expression profile of a gene of unknown function unless the gene is of particular interest or is a candidate gene involved in a human trait or disorder.