Cited by 181Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Missing data in multi-omics integration: Recent advances through artificial intelligence

Open access
Flores, Javier E., Claborne, Daniel M., Weller, Zachary D., Webb-Robertson, Bobbie-Jo M., Waters, Katrina M., Bramer, Lisa M.·2023·Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Biological systems function through complex interactions between various ‘omics (biomolecules), and a more complete understanding of these systems is only possible through an integrated, multi-omic perspective. This has presented the need for the development of integration approaches that are able to capture the complex, often non-linear, interactions that define these biological systems and are adapted to the challenges of combining the heterogenous data across ‘omic views. A principal challenge to multi-omic integration is missing data because all biomolecules are not measured in all samples. Due to either cost, instrument sensitivity, or other experimental factors, data for a biological sample may be missing for one or more ‘omic techologies. Recent methodological developments in artificial intelligence and statistical learning have greatly facilitated the analyses of multi-omics data, however many of these techniques assume access to completely observed data. A subset of these methods incorporate mechanisms for handling partially observed samples, and these methods are the focus of this review. We describe recently developed approaches, noting their primary use cases and highlighting each method's approach to handling missing data. We additionally provide an overview of the more traditional missing data workflows and their limitations; and we discuss potential avenues for further developments as well as how the missing data issue and its current solutions may generalize beyond the multi-omics context.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review surveys recent AI/ML multi-omics integration methods that explicitly handle partially observed data, either by joint imputation within the model or by optimization masking of missing components. It also summarizes traditional missing-data workflows and discusses limitations, especially sample-size demands, limited coverage of mass-spectrometry omics, and interpretability.

Key findings

  • Missing data are pervasive in omics: proteomics can have 20–50% of possible peptide values unquantified, and the human proteome project estimates ~20% of genes yield protein products not detected by mass spectrometry.
  • The review groups missing-data-robust integration methods into joint-imputation approaches (e.g., FBM, iMODA, MOFA/MOFA+, BIDIFAC+) and optimization-masking approaches (e.g., TiMEG, COMBI, MVAE, DeepMF, MvNE, DeepIMV, JACA, SUMO, NEMO, MSNE, MONET), across early, middle, and late integration categories.
  • Reported performance varies with missingness: FBM prediction RMSE increased with missing percentage, most prominently when both gene expression and methylation had 30% missingness; iMODA power decreased with 50% and 30% missingness; MOFA imputation had lower MSE than feature-wise mean, SoftImpute, and KNN across ~10–80% missingness; DeepMF identified simulated MCAR sample/feature subgroups with perfect accuracy at 10%, 50%, and 70% missingness; SUMO slightly outperformed NEMO except at extreme missingness (80% and greater).
  • BIDIFAC+ enables bi-dimensional integration across omics and sample cohorts, but took nearly 24 h to converge on a combined TCGA dataset, and assumes shared structures are present across integrated matrices.

Methods

  • Narrative review of AI/ML and statistical-learning approaches for multi-omics integration that accommodate missing data, plus background on traditional missing-data mechanisms (MCAR, MAR, MNAR) and imputation/complete-case workflows.
  • Methods are categorized by integration strategy (early/concatenation, middle/transformation-based, late/model-based) and by missing-data handling strategy (joint-imputation vs. optimization-masking).
  • Table 1 summarizes each reviewed method’s integration approach, missing-data approach, compatible omics platforms, primary use case, application dataset characteristics, and software availability.

Limitations

  • The paper states that many reviewed methods implicitly require relatively large sample sizes, as their application datasets contain hundreds to thousands of observations, which may be prohibitive for rare diseases or small studies.
  • The paper states that many methods were motivated by or evaluated on sequencing-based omics, with few considering metabolomics, proteomics, or lipidomics, where mass-spectrometry-specific batch effects, missingness mechanisms, and identification uncertainty may violate model assumptions.
  • The paper notes that only FBM and iMODA describe how correlation structure is modeled or affects results among joint-imputation approaches, and that many middle-integration methods are black-box with limited interpretability; evident from the text, this is a review rather than an independent benchmark, so performance claims are drawn from original publications and simulations.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frai.2023.1098308

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 80 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingnone given

    Few of the multi-omics integration methods reviewed explicitly require the use of multi-omics data.

    “While all these methods have been presented within the context of multi-omics integration, few explicitly require the use multi-omics data.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Many of the middle integration methods discussed in this review are black-box in nature, as the specific relationships learned by each are often incommunicable.

    “many of the middle integration methods discussed here are black-box in nature, as the specific relationships learned by each are often incommunicable.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Premisecitation

    Data integration is one of the primary barriers to effective multi-omics research and reaching the desired holistic view of the biological system being studied.

    “However, data integration is one of the primary barriers to effective multi-omics research and reaching the desired holistic view of the biological system being studied (Misra et al., 2019).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Misra et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisenone given

    Many recent artificial intelligence and statistical learning techniques for multi-omics data assume access to completely observed data.

    “Recent methodological developments in artificial intelligence and statistical learning have greatly facilitated the analyses of multi-omics data, however many of these techniques assume access to completely observed data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Premisereasoning

    A subset of artificial intelligence and statistical learning methods for multi-omics incorporate mechanisms for handling partially observed samples.

    “A subset of these methods incorporate mechanisms for handling partially observed samples, and these methods are the focus of this review.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 41
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 30
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Identifying these groupings within latent factors is often a post-hoc process, and such domain-relevant groupings are not always identifiable within generated latent factors.

    “Identifying these groupings within latent factors is often a post-hoc process, however, and such domain-relevant groupings are not always identifiable within generated latent factors.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    A principal challenge to multi-omic integration is missing data because all biomolecules are not measured in all samples.

    “A principal challenge to multi-omic integration is missing data because all biomolecules are not measured in all samples.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Hinderances to effective integration methods include the heterogeneous nature of data and distributional properties across multi-omics datasets, the typically large difference in the number of measured biomolecules compared to number of samples or replicates, and the complex and often noisy nature of biological data.

    “Hinderances to effective integration methods include, but are not limited to, the heterogeneous nature of data and distributional properties across multi-omics datasets, the typically large difference in the number of measured biomolecules compared to number of samples or replicates, and the complex and often noisy nature of biological data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Data for a biological sample may be missing for one or more 'omic technologies due to cost, instrument sensitivity, or other experimental factors.

    “Due to either cost, instrument sensitivity, or other experimental factors, data for a biological sample may be missing for one or more ‘omic techologies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Additional complexities including protein isolation and solubilization, sequence ambiguity, and a lack of standards in statistical thresholds and algorithms result in inconsistent detection of large proportions of protein products that are detected, thus limiting the reproducibility of data collection and analysis.

    “Furthermore, additional complexities including protein isolation and solubilization, sequence ambiguity, and a lack of standards in statistical thresholds and algorithms result in inconsistent detection of large proportions of protein products that are detected, thus limiting the reproducibility of data collection and analysis (Goh and Wong, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Goh and Wong, 2017

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In 'omics studies, data are more commonly MNAR or MAR, considering that instruments are known to have certain detection thresholds (MNAR) and that biochemical dependencies exist between different biomolecules (MAR).

    “In ‘omics studies, data are more commonly MNAR or MAR, considering that instruments are known to have certain detection thresholds (MNAR) and that biochemical dependencies exist between different biomolecules (MAR).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    If an entire view is missing for one or more samples and must be imputed, any level of similarity specific to that view may be lost.

    “If an entire view is missing for one or more samples and must be imputed, any level of similarity specific to that view may be lost.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Missing data are common in 'omics data and can arise due to a variety of reasons, such as poor tissue quality, insufficient sample volume, measurement system limitations, budget restrictions, or subject dropout.

    “Missing data are common in ‘omics data and can arise due to a variety of reasons, such as poor tissue quality, insufficient sample volume, measurement system limitations, budget restrictions, or subject dropout.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When faced with missing data, these integration methods require a complete case analysis or the implementation of separate imputation steps beforehand.

    “When faced with missing data, these methods thus require a complete case analysis or the implementation of separate imputation steps beforehand.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Models incorporating gene-gene and methylation-methylation correlations were considered for FBM but had higher computational cost without substantive performance gains relative to independence models.

    “However the authors note that models incorporating gene-gene and methylation-methylation correlations were additionally considered, but these models were associated with a higher computational cost without indicating substantive gains in performance relative to models based on the independence assumption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fang et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: The FBM model assumes gene-gene and methylation-methylation independence, and imputed values reflect this assumption.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given the prevalence of missing data across different 'omics, the approach that machine learning and artificial intelligence models use in handling missing observations is of great importance when considering multi-omics integration methods.

    “Given the prevalence of missing data across different ‘omics, the approach that ML and AI models use in handling missing observations is of great importance when considering multi-omics integration methods.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    KNN imputation has been shown to work well for numerical imputation on single datasets, but the algorithm is sensitive to the choice of the number of nearest neighbors (k) and is limited in that it does not utilize the potential structure across the entire set of observations.

    “KNN imputation has been shown to work well for numerical imputation on single datasets (Jadhav et al., 2019), but the algorithm is sensitive to the choice of the number of nearest neighbors (k) and is limited in that it does not utilize the potential structure across the entire set of observations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jadhav et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Available case analysis, while more robust than complete case analysis since less data are dropped, is still only valid under the MCAR assumption and generates conclusions based on different parts of the data, potentially leading to biased or conflicting inference.

    “While more robust than a complete case analysis since less data are dropped, an available case analysis is still only valid under the MCAR assumption and generates conclusions based on different parts of the data, potentially leading to biased or conflicting inference.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Zero-value or LOD imputation, like mean imputation, may distort feature distributions and lead to biased parameter and variability estimates.

    “However, like mean imputation, imputed values from these approaches may distort feature distributions and lead to biased parameter and variability estimates (Lubin et al., 2004; Succop et al., 2004; Webb-Robertson et al., 2015; Lazar et al., 2016; Bramer et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Lubin et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Succop et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Webb-Robertson et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Middle integration applies some transformation to represent a complex combination of the datasets before applying downstream analyses.

    “Middle integration applies some transformation to represent a complex combination of the datasets before applying downstream analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ritchie et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Missing samples in multi-omics data are rarely MCAR, and thus inference based on a complete case analysis is likely to be biased.

    “Missing samples in multi-omics data are rarely MCAR, and thus inference based on a complete case analysis is likely to be biased.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Both the Xie et al. (2019) and Xu et al. (2019) methods require complete input, and initial imputation is performed in both cases to accommodate.

    “Both these methods require complete input, and initial imputation is performed in both cases to accommodate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Xie et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xu et al., 2019

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Kernel-based methods rely on an imputation pre-processing step, which could possibly negatively affect the downstream analyses, as the relationships between nodes/samples/biomarkers may be biased toward similarities in imputation.

    “These methods rely on an imputation pre-processing step, which could possibly negatively affect the downstream analyses, as the relationships between nodes/samples/biomarkers may be biased toward similarities in imputation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    Integration techniques generally assume measurements from the same samples on several markers, or features, from several 'omics-data types, which are more generally referred to as data views.

    “Integration techniques generally assume measurements from the same samples on several markers, or features, from several ‘omics-data types, which are more generally referred to as data “views”.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Mean imputation preserves feature means and grants access to the use of more data, but does not preserve relationships among variables and may lead to an underestimate of variability.

    “While this simple approach preserves feature means and grants access to the use of more data, it does not preserve relationships among variables and may lead to an underestimate of variability (Gelman and Hill, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gelman and Hill, 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    In metabolomics, limited coverage of the known metabolome increases the risk of overlooking the metabolomic response of interest in targeted metabolomic analyses.

    “In metabolomics, limited coverage of the known metabolome increases the risk of overlooking the metabolomic response of interest in targeted metabolomic analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Early integration is primarily characterized by an initial concatenation of the features across all measured 'omics, followed by application of methods appropriate for analyzing the resulting high-dimensional dataset.

    “Early integration is primarily characterized by an initial concatenation of the features across all measured ‘omics, followed by application of methods appropriate for analyzing the resulting high-dimensional dataset.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ritchie et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Late integration analyzes each dataset separately and introduces a model or algorithm that combines the outputs of each individual analysis.

    “Late integration analyzes each dataset separately and introduces a model or algorithm that combines the outputs of each individual analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ritchie et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Peptides may be missing from one or more samples due to a variety of underlying mechanisms, which can result in non-trivial amounts of potential observations being missing.

    “Peptides may be missing from one or more samples due to a variety of underlying mechanisms (Daly et al., 2008; Karpievitch et al., 2009), which can result in non-trivial amounts of potential observations being missing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Daly et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Karpievitch et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given the ubiquity of partially observed cases in multi-omics datasets-and that most integrative multi-omics methods are not inherently compatible with partially observed data-imputation methods are often incorporated as a data pre-processing step within the multi-omics analytic pipeline, or alternatively, partially observed samples are dropped and a complete case analysis is performed.

    “Given the ubiquity of partially observed cases in multi-omics datasets—and that most integrative multi-omics methods are not inherently compatible with partially observed data—imputation methods are often incorporated as a data pre-processing step within the multi-omics analytic pipeline, or alternatively, partially observed samples are dropped and a complete case analysis is performed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given the tendency of neural networks to overfit to the training data, it is possible that any bias in the imputation of the training data-which is likely due to the common violation of MAR in 'omics data-will be erroneously exploited by the network.

    “Given the tendency of neural networks to overfit to the training data, it is possible that any bias in the imputation of the training data—which is likely due to the common violation of MAR in ‘omics data—will be erroneously exploited by the network.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the MOFA comparison, missing percentages ranged between approximately 10% and 80%, and all methods showed increased mean squared error of prediction with increased missing percentage.

    “The missing percentages considered ranged between ~10–~80%, and all methods demonstrated increases to mean squared error of prediction with increased missing percentage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Argelaguet et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complete case analysis, while convenient, results in a decrease in sample size, throws away useful data, is only valid under the MCAR assumption and can otherwise lead to biased estimates.

    “This approach, while convenient, results in a decrease in sample size, throws away useful data, is only valid under the MCAR assumption and can otherwise lead to biased estimates (Fang et al., 2018; Hawinkel et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fang et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hawinkel et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Multi-omics data are uniquely characterized by several separate, yet related, datasets, which has motivated the development of newer approaches that leverage information across different 'omics datasets to inform imputations.

    “Each of the previously described imputation methods have generally been developed within the context of a single dataset, however multi-omics data are uniquely characterized by several separate, yet related, datasets. This aspect of multi-omics has therefore motivated the development of several newer approaches that leverage information across different ‘omics datasets to inform imputations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    iMODA's power to detect effects of interest varies with the proportion of missing data, and power decreases as missingness increases.

    “The power of the iMODA framework to detect the effects of interest has been reported to vary according to the proportion of data that are missing. The authors considered cases where 50% and 30% of data were missing, finding that power decreases with increased missingness.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lin et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: The known causal hierarchy across biomolecules is that genotype affects omic expression, which influences phenotype.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Many methods described were motivated by or evaluated exclusively on sequencing-based omics platforms, and few considered the fuller breadth of omics platforms including metabolomics, proteomics, and lipidomics.

    “Related to this point, many of the methods described here were motivated by or evaluated exclusively on sequencing-based omics platforms (e.g., transcriptomics, genomics, and epigenomics) and few considered the fuller breadth of omics platforms that includes metabolomics, proteomics, lipidomics, etc.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Data of non-sequencing omics are typically generated by a mass spectrometer, an instrument whose use introduces several nuances to the data which may mean integration model assumptions reasonably made for sequencing-based data may not hold for mass spectrometry-based data.

    “Contrasting with the sequencing-based ‘omics used by many of the methods reviewed in this work, data of other ‘omics are typically generated by a mass spectrometer, an instrument whose use introduces several nuances to the data which may mean integration model assumptions reasonably made for sequencing-based data may not hold for mass spectrometry-based data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The datasets considered by these approaches contain hundreds, if not thousands, of observations, sample sizes that may be practically prohibitive due to cost, biospecimen availability, or both.

    “The datasets considered by these approaches contain hundreds, if not thousands, of observations, sample sizes that may be practically prohibitive due to cost, biospecimen availability, or both.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    MONET has no constraint on the number of detected modules and no upper bound on module size.

    “Notably, there is no constraint on the number of detected modules, nor is there an upper bound on module size.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rappoport et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    BIDIFAC+ assumes that shared structures are present across the integrated matrices, an assumption that may be violated in practice.

    “However, Lock et al. (2022) note that BIDIFAC+ assumes that shared structures are present across the integrated matrices, an assumption that may be violated in practice.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lock et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: BIDIFAC+ assumes that shared structures are present across the integrated matrices.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    MVAE's product-of-experts model architecture is robust to partially observed samples, combining only the omic-specific encodings of each partial sample's observed omics during model training.

    “This PoE model architecture is robust to partially observed samples, combining only the ‘omic-specific encodings of each partial sample's observed ‘omics during model training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wu and Goodman (2018)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: MVAE assumes that data views are independent from one another, given a shared latent representation.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premiseown data

    SUMO's range of adjusted rand index values was typically narrower than NEMO's, suggesting less variability in expected performance.

    “As well, the range of adjusted rand index values (the performance metric used) was typically observed to be narrower for SUMO, suggesting less variability in expected performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sienkiewicz et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rappoport and Shamir, 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    MONET's authors propose a heuristic algorithm that identifies a local maximum and recommend using the best solution from repeated runs to better approximate the globally maximal solution.

    “The authors circumvent this issue by proposing a heuristic algorithm that identifies a local maximum and recommend using the best solution from repeated runs of the algorithm to better approximate the globally maximal solution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rappoport et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    DeepMF's perfect-accuracy evaluations were completed in a simulated data setting in which data were simulated as missing completely at random (MCAR) and ground truth feature subgroups were generated with simple discrimination boundaries.

    “However, it should be noted that these evaluations were completed in a simulated data setting in which data were simulated as missing completely at random (MCAR) and ground truth feature subgroups were generated with simple discrimination boundaries.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chen et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    These methods commonly investigate differences in early, middle, and late fusion, and work has been done to address view-missing and view-heterogeneity problems.

    “These methods also commonly investigate differences in “early”, “middle”, and “late” fusion and work has even been done to address the view-missing and view-heterogeneity problems (Nagrani et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Nagrani et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wang et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The criteria of sets of features from distinct views across a shared set of samples is applicable to any domain where the combination of different data sources provides a more complete representation of the system under investigation.

    “The criteria of sets of features from distinct views across a shared set of samples is applicable to any domain where the combination of different data sources provides a more complete representation of the system under investigation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Dependencies exist between different omics data, but important differences between omics must also be accounted for in developed integrative approaches.

    “On the other hand, though dependencies exist between different ‘omics data, important differences between ‘omics must also be accounted for in developed integrative approaches.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In untargeted metabolomics and lipidomics, false discovery rates are difficult to compute and largely not accurate.

    “In untargeted metabolomics and lipidomics false discovery rates are difficult to compute and largely not accurate (Stein, 1994; Jeong et al., 2011; Matsuda et al., 2013; Kim and Zhang, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Stein, 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jeong et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Matsuda et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    MONET incorporates partially observed samples by representing their missing components as edgeless nodes within their corresponding edge-weighted graphs.

    “This algorithm incorporates partially observed samples by representing their missing components as edgeless nodes within their corresponding edge-weighted graphs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rappoport et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Low-sample-size cases present the need for methods that generate reliable inference despite smaller sample sizes and avoid overfitting to the data.

    “These cases present the need for methods that generate reliable inference despite smaller sample sizes and avoid overfitting to the data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Many of the deep-learning architectures mentioned in this review have similarities to ones used in analysis of digital media that try to combine multiple modalities to improve predictive performance of video content.

    “many of the deep-learning architectures mentioned in this review have similarities to ones used in analysis of digital media that try to combine multiple modalities to improve predictive performance of video content (Carreira and Zisserman, 2017; Afouras et al., 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Carreira and Zisserman, 2017 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Afouras et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A study to identify biomarkers for Snyder Robinson syndrome obtained data on 16 patients, only three of which presented with the disorder of interest.

    “For example, a study to identify biomarkers for Snyder Robinson syndrome, a rare neurological disorder, obtained data on 16 patients, only three of which presented with the disorder of interest (Abela et al., 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Abela et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Manual verification of metabolites following identification scoring is required for shotgun metabolomics because scoring methods are much less mature than for other omics data types.

    “manual verification of metabolites following identification scoring is required for shotgun metabolomics, as scoring methods are much less mature than for other ‘omics data types (Stein and Scott, 1994; Samaraweera et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Stein and Scott, 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Samaraweera et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The larger sample size requirement is implicit because it is rarely stated as a limitation but is implied by the sample sizes of the datasets these methods were successfully applied to.

    “We describe this requirement as “implicit” given that it is rarely, if ever, stated as a limitation, but instead implied based on the sample sizes of the datasets that these methods were successfully applied to.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Using AUROC on TCGA and CCLE benchmark datasets, DeepIMV's performance diminished with increased missingness but performed as well as or better than compared approaches.

    “Using the area under the receiver-operator curve (AUROC) as a performance metric, the authors found that the performance of DeepIMV diminished with increased missingness but performed as well as or better than the compared approaches.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lee and van der Schaar, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    BIDIFAC+ took nearly 24 hours to reach convergence when fitted to a combined TCGA dataset, and thus may not scale well with larger aggregations of datasets.

    “As well, they noted that BIDIFAC+ took nearly 24 h to reach convergence when fitted to a combined TCGA dataset, and thus the method may not scale well with larger aggregations of datasets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lock et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Around 19 samples per group are needed to detect a fold change of 1.5 in microRNA data at 80% power and false discovery rate <10%.

    “Kok et al. (2018) notes, for example, that one may need around 19 samples per group to detect a fold change of 1.5 in microRNA data at 80% power and false discovery rate <10%.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kok et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Insights from the omics domain, where some of these issues are most salient, could transfer to other domains.

    “Insights from the ‘omics domain, where some of these issues are most salient, could transfer to other domains.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The methodological choices inherent to the omics domain are usually the ones that offer the ability to constrain or elucidate relationships between biomarkers.

    “The methodological choices inherent to the ‘omics domain are usually the ones that offer the ability to constrain or elucidate relationships between biomarkers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The groupings implicit within the latent factors generated by these models may be contextualized according to domain-specific knowledge, thus increasing their interpretability and allowing one to infer underlying relationships.

    “the groupings implicit within the latent factors generated by these models may be contextualized according to domain-specific knowledge (e.g., shared molecular pathways), thus increasing their interpretability and allowing one to infer underlying relationships.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Common methodological choices in the omics domain include principal-component-like representations that might identify important groups of biomarkers, and injection of prior knowledge through techniques that constrain relationships between features, such as directed edges in graph representations, hard parameter constraints, or carefully chosen priors in Bayesian frameworks.

    “Some common choices are the use of principal-component-like representations that might identify important groups of biomarkers, and the injection of prior knowledge through techniques that constrain the relationships between features such as directed edges in graph representations, hard parameter constraints, or carefully chosen priors in”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “the relationships between features such as directed edges in graph representations, hard parameter constraints, or carefully chosen priors in Bayesian frameworks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Incorporating domain knowledge may be key toward bridging the interpretability gap apparent across these methods.

    “incorporating domain knowledge may be key toward bridging the interpretability gap apparent across these methods.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the generation of these latent factors were instead guided by domain knowledge, resulting groupings may be more likely to hold relevance and rely less on post-hoc analyses for contextualization within the scientific domain.

    “If the generation of these latent factors were instead guided by domain knowledge, resulting groupings may be more likely to hold relevance and rely less on post-hoc analyses for contextualization”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
      “instead guided by domain knowledge, resulting groupings may be more likely to hold relevance and rely less on post-hoc analyses for contextualization within the scientific domain.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
58 of 58
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Existing multi-omics data integration review articles either do not address or only briefly mention methods for handling missing observations.

    “Despite the importance of considering methods for handling missing observations, this topic is either not addressed or is only briefly mentioned in existing multi-omics data integration review articles.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The iBAG approach assumes completely observed data.

    “The iBAG approach assumes completely observed data, and to remedy this, the FBM approach introduces a third, imputation layer that models missing gene expression and methylation data through multivariate normal distributions.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The FBM model assumes gene-gene and methylation-methylation independence, and imputed values reflect this assumption.

    “Also worth noting is that the FBM model assumes gene-gene and methylation-methylation independence and imputed values reflect this assumption accordingly.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    MVAE assumes that data views are independent from one another, given a shared latent representation.

    “One key assumption made by this approach is that data views are independent from one another, given a shared latent representation.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    BIDIFAC+ assumes that shared structures are present across the integrated matrices.

    “Lock et al. (2022) note that BIDIFAC+ assumes that shared structures are present across the integrated matrices, an assumption that may be violated in practice.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The known causal hierarchy across biomolecules is that genotype affects omic expression, which influences phenotype.

    “The proposed framework is aligned with the known causal hierarchy across these biomolecules, i.e., genotype affects ‘omic expression which influences phenotype.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Gene expression is known to be affected by changes to the DNA sequence.

    “For example, gene expression is known to be affected by changes to the DNA sequence.”
7 of 7

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

11 of the 148 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Achille, 2017, Emergence of invariance and disentanglement in deep representations, J. Machine Learn. Res., 19, 1, 10.48550/arxiv.1706.01350 · DOI
  2. A variational information bottleneck approach to multi-omics data integration,15131521 LeeC. van der SchaarM. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics2021
  3. Sindhwani, 2005, A co-regularization approach to semi-supervised learning with multiple views,

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flores, J. E., Claborne, D. M., Weller, Z. D., Webb-Robertson, B.-J. M., Waters, K. M., & Bramer, L. M.
Affiliations
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Bramer, Lisa M.
Venue
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
Published
2023-02-09
Volume
6
Pages
1098308-1098308
ISSN
2624-8212 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4319759388
Cited by
181
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 11
FWCI
4.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
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
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
missing data, multi-omics integration, artificial intelligence, statistical learning, missing data imputation, data heterogeneity, biological systems

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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