期刊论文详细信息
Genome Medicine
Analysis of transcriptomic features reveals molecular endotypes of SLE with clinical implications
Research
Peter E. Lipsky1  Erika L. Hubbard1  Prathyusha Bachali1  Kathryn M. Kingsmore1  Amrie C. Grammer1  Michelle D. Catalina2  Yisha He3 
[1] AMPEL BioSolutions, LLC, 250 W. Main St. #300, 22902, Charlottesville, VA, USA;RILITE Research Institute, 22902, Charlottesville, VA, USA;AbbVie, 01605, Worcester, MA, USA;Altria, 23230, Richmond, VA, USA;
关键词: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE);    Autoimmunity;    Inflammation;    Gene expression;    Endotype;    Machine learning (ML);   
DOI  :  10.1186/s13073-023-01237-9
 received in 2023-03-09, accepted in 2023-09-25,  发布年份 2023
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is known to be clinically heterogeneous. Previous efforts to characterize subsets of SLE patients based on gene expression analysis have not been reproduced because of small sample sizes or technical problems. The aim of this study was to develop a robust patient stratification system using gene expression profiling to characterize individual lupus patients.MethodsWe employed gene set variation analysis (GSVA) of informative gene modules to identify molecular endotypes of SLE patients, machine learning (ML) to classify individual patients into molecular subsets, and logistic regression to develop a composite metric estimating the scope of immunologic perturbations. SHapley Additive ExPlanations (SHAP) revealed the impact of specific features on patient sub-setting.ResultsUsing five datasets comprising 2183 patients, eight SLE endotypes were identified. Expanded analysis of 3166 samples in 17 datasets revealed that each endotype had unique gene enrichment patterns, but not all endotypes were observed in all datasets. ML algorithms trained on 2183 patients and tested on 983 patients not used to develop the model demonstrated effective classification into one of eight endotypes. SHAP indicated a unique array of features influential in sorting individual samples into each of the endotypes. A composite molecular score was calculated for each patient and significantly correlated with standard laboratory measures. Significant differences in clinical characteristics were associated with different endotypes, with those with the least perturbed transcriptional profile manifesting lower disease severity. The more abnormal endotypes were significantly more likely to experience a severe flare over the subsequent 52 weeks while on standard-of-care medication and specific endotypes were more likely to be clinical responders to the investigational product tested in one clinical trial analyzed (tabalumab).ConclusionsTranscriptomic profiling and ML reproducibly separated lupus patients into molecular endotypes with significant differences in clinical features, outcomes, and responsiveness to therapy. Our classification approach using a composite scoring system based on underlying molecular abnormalities has both staging and prognostic relevance.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202311101769674ZK.pdf 15442KB PDF download
Fig. 2 194KB Image download
12937_2016_133_Article_IEq1.gif 1KB Image download
Fig. 1 1997KB Image download
12936_2016_1182_Article_IEq39.gif 1KB Image download
Fig. 2 209KB Image download
MediaObjects/13046_2023_2862_MOESM5_ESM.png 235KB Other download
12951_2016_177_Article_IEq1.gif 1KB Image download
MediaObjects/41408_2023_930_MOESM5_ESM.docx 42KB Other download
12951_2017_255_Article_IEq45.gif 1KB Image download
Fig. 3 603KB Image download
【 图 表 】

Fig. 3

12951_2017_255_Article_IEq45.gif

12951_2016_177_Article_IEq1.gif

Fig. 2

12936_2016_1182_Article_IEq39.gif

Fig. 1

12937_2016_133_Article_IEq1.gif

Fig. 2

【 参考文献 】
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7]
  • [8]
  • [9]
  • [10]
  • [11]
  • [12]
  • [13]
  • [14]
  • [15]
  • [16]
  • [17]
  • [18]
  • [19]
  • [20]
  • [21]
  • [22]
  • [23]
  • [24]
  • [25]
  • [26]
  • [27]
  • [28]
  • [29]
  • [30]
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  • [37]
  • [38]
  • [39]
  • [40]
  • [41]
  • [42]
  • [43]
  • [44]
  • [45]
  • [46]
  • [47]
  • [48]
  • [49]
  • [50]
  • [51]
  • [52]
  • [53]
  • [54]
  • [55]
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:3次 浏览次数:0次