Classification Using Generalized Partial Least Squares

The advances in computational biology have made simultaneous monitoring of thousands of features possible. The high throughput technologies not only bring about a much richer information context in which to study various aspects of gene functions but they also present challenge of analyzing data with large number of covariates and few samples. As an integral part of machine learning, classification of samples into two or more categories is almost always of interest to scientists. In this paper, we address the question of classification in this setting by extending partial least squares (PLS), a popular dimension reduction tool in chemometrics, in the context of generalized linear regression based on a previous approach, Iteratively ReWeighted Partial Least Squares, i.e. IRWPLS (Marx, 1996). We compare our results with two-stage PLS (Nguyen and Rocke, 2002A; Nguyen and Rocke, 2002B) and other classifiers. We show that by phrasing the problem in a generalized linear model setting and by applying bias correction to the likelihood to avoid (quasi)separation, we often get lower classification error rates.

RANDOM EFFECTS MODELS IN A META-ANALYSIS OF THE ACCURACY OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTS WITHIN A GOLD STANDARD IN THE PRESENCE OF MISSING DATA

In evaluating the accuracy of diagnosis tests, it is common to apply two imperfect tests jointly or sequentially to a study population. In a recent meta-analysis of the accuracy of microsatellite instability testing (MSI) and traditional mutation analysis (MUT) in predicting germline mutations of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes, a Bayesian approach (Chen, Watson, and Parmigiani 2005) was proposed to handle missing data resulting from partial testing and the lack of a gold standard. In this paper, we demonstrate an improved estimation of the sensitivities and specificities of MSI and MUT by using a nonlinear mixed model and a Bayesian hierarchical model, both of which account for the heterogeneity across studies through study-specific random effects. The methods can be used to estimate the accuracy of two imperfect diagnostic tests in other meta-analyses when the prevalence of disease, the sensitivities and/or the specificities of diagnostic tests are heterogeneous among studies. Furthermore, simulation studies have demonstrated the importance of carefully selecting appropriate random effects on the estimation of diagnostic accuracy measurements in this scenario.