Cited by 28Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene expression and cancer classificationStatistical Methods and Applications

SDGCCA: Supervised Deep Generalized Canonical Correlation Analysis for Multi-Omics Integration

Open access
Moon, Sehwan, Hwang, Jeongyoung, Lee, Hyunju·2022·Journal of Computational Biology

Abstract

Integration of multi-omics data provides opportunities for revealing biological mechanisms related to certain phenotypes. We propose a novel method of multi-omics integration called supervised deep generalized canonical correlation analysis (SDGCCA) for modeling correlation structures between nonlinear multi-omics manifolds that aims at improving the classification of phenotypes and revealing the biomarkers related to phenotypes. SDGCCA addresses the limitations of other canonical correlation analysis (CCA)-based models (such as deep CCA, deep generalized CCA) by considering complex/nonlinear cross-data correlations between multiple ( ≥ 2) modalities. Although there are a few methods to learn nonlinear CCA projections for classifying phenotypes, they only consider two views. Methods extended to multiple views either do not perform classification or do not provide feature ranking. In contrast, SDGCCA is a nonlinear multi-view CCA projection method that performs classification and ranks features. When we applied SDGCCA in predicting patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and discrimination of early- and late-stage cancers, it outperformed other CCA-based and other supervised methods. In addition, we demonstrate that SDGCCA can be applied for feature selection to identify important multi-omics biomarkers. On applying AD data, SDGCCA identified clusters of genes in multi-omics data, well known to be associated with AD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/cmb.2021.0598

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moon, S., Hwang, J., & Lee, H.
Affiliations
Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
Corresponding author
Lee, Hyunju
Venue
Journal of Computational Biology
Published
2022-08-01
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
892-907
ISSN
  • 1066-5277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-8666
OpenAlex
W4224300102
Cited by
28
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Computational Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG017917, R01AG030146, R01AG036836, R01AG036042, R01AG015819, P30AG010161)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
multi-omics integration, nonlinear canonical correlation analysis, phenotype classification, biomarker discovery, feature ranking, feature selection, Alzheimer's disease, gene clustering
MeSH terms
Canonical Correlation Analysis, Alzheimer Disease, Humans

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