Machine learning-based identification and validation of immune-related biomarkers for early diagnosis and targeted therapy in diabetic retinopathy
Abstract
The early diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy (DR) is challenging, highlighting the urgent need to identify new biomarkers. Immune responses play a crucial role in DR, yet there are currently no reports of machine learning (ML) algorithms being utilized for the development of immune-related molecular markers in DR. Based on the datasets GSE102485 and GSE160306, differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were screened using Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA). Five ML algorithms including Bayesian, Learning Vector Quantization (LVQ), Wrapper (Boruta), Random Forest (RF), and Logistic Regression were employed to select immune-related genes associated with DR (DR.Sig). Seven ML algorithms including Naive Bayes (NB), RF, Support Vector Machine (SVM), AdaBoost Classification Trees (AdaBoost), Boosted Logistic Regressions (LogitBoost), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Cancerclass were utilized to construct a predictive model for DR. The relationship between DR.Sig genes and immune cells was analyzed using single-sample Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (ssGSEA). Additionally, drug sensitivity prediction of DR.Sig genes and molecular docking were performed. Through the utilization of 5 ML algorithms, 6 immune-related biomarkers closely related to the occurrence of DR were identified, including FCGR2B, CSRP1, EDNRA, SDC2, TEK, and CIITA. The DR predictive model constructed based on these 6 DR.Sig genes using the Cancerclass algorithm demonstrated superior predictive performance co…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Only two of seven omics-based DR studies employed untargeted approaches.
“All included studies adopted retrospective and single-center designs, with only two (2/7) employing untargeted approaches [54, 55], while the remaining primarily utilized targeted omics profiling.”
From Artificial intelligence-powered prediction of diabetic complications: from clinical data to molecular omics (2026) · cites this paper as [54]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 77 · Cited by 16
- Authors
- Tao, Y., Xiong, M., Peng, Y., Yao, L., Zhu, H., Zhou, Q., & Ouyang, J.
- Affiliations
- Nanchang University (CN)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CN)
- Xiamen University (CN)
- Jiujiang First People's Hospital (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zhou, Qiong
- Ouyang, Jun
- Venue
- Gene
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-01
- Volume
- 934
- Pages
- 149015
- ISSN
- 0378-1119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4403528246
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 6.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Gene (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
- Keywords
- diabetic retinopathy, immune-related biomarkers, early diagnosis, differentially expressed genes, immune cell infiltration, drug response prediction, targeted therapy, Fc gamma receptor IIb, ETA receptor, syndecan-2, traditional ecological knowledge, CIITA, etoposide, FR139317, camptothecin, molecular docking, gene expression signatures
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Algorithms, Bayes Theorem, Diabetic Retinopathy, Humans, Biomarkers, Gene Expression Profiling, Early Diagnosis, Gene Regulatory Networks, Molecular Targeted Therapy, Support Vector Machine, Molecular Docking Simulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review