4.7 Article

Combining K Nearest Neighbor With Nonnegative Matrix Factorization for Predicting Circrna-Disease Associations

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TCBB.2022.3180903

关键词

Gaussian kernel similarity; semantic similarity; K nearest neighbor; circRNA-disease association; nonnegative Matrix Factorization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, a novel method called KNN-NMF is proposed to infer associations between circRNA and disease. The experiment results indicate that KNN-NMF outperforms other methods in prediction performance and shows good performance in case studies of two common diseases.
Accumulating evidences show that circular RNAs (circRNAs) play an important role in regulating gene expression, and involve in many complex human diseases. Identifying associations of circRNA with disease helps to understand the pathogenesis, treatment and diagnosis of complex diseases. Since inferring circRNA-disease associations by biological experiments is costly and time-consuming, there is an urgently need to develop a computational model to identify the association between them. In this paper, we proposed a novel method named KNN-NMF, which combines K nearest neighbors with nonnegative matrix factorization to infer associations between circRNA and disease (KNN-NMF). Frist, we compute the Gaussian Interaction Profile (GIP) kernel similarity of circRNA and disease, the semantic similarity of disease, respectively. Then, the circRNA-disease new interaction profiles are established using weight K nearest neighbors to reduce the false negative association impact on prediction performance. Finally, Nonnegative Matrix Factorization is implemented to predict associations of circRNA with disease. The experiment results indicate that the prediction performance of KNN-NMF outperforms the competing methods under five-fold cross-validation. Moreover, case studies of two common diseases further show that KNN-NMF can identify potential circRNA-disease associations effectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据