Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Classification and diagnostic prediction of prostate cancer using gene expression and artificial neural networks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the fourth most common cancer among all cancers and the second most common cancer in men. The rate of increase in prostate cancer incidence is higher than the overall increase of cancer incidents. 68% of prostate cancer cases are from developed countries. There has been very little research on the most suitable techniques for analysing prostate cancer gene expression datasets to identify those genes that may be most related to prostate cancer. This paper attempts to identify significant (influential) attributes in a well-established prostate cancer gene expression dataset consisting of over 12,533 attributes for 102 samples (50 normal, 52 tumour). Several (7) different statistical and artificial intelligence (AI)-based feature selection methods were paired with four different classifiers, namely ANNs, Naive Bayes, AdaBoost and J48. Prediction experiments are carried using ANNs with unseen sample testing. In our experiments, ANNs outperformed all other approaches for classification with sequential forward feature selection (SFFS), achieving 100% accuracy. Naive Bayes and AdaBoost achieved best accuracy of 96.3 and 93.13% with support vector machine (SVM) attribute selection, whereas J48 could get only 89.21% with SFFS approach. For prediction experiments, ANNs obtained an accuracy of 95.1% with SVM attribute selection (correctly predicting 96 out of 102 samples). Finally, by investigating National Center for Biotechnology Information database it is found that 21 out of 24 attributes (87.5%) that belong to SVM attribute selection have a reference to cancer/tumour, thereby establishing a link between feature selection and biological plausibility. The main contribution of this paper is in identifying the importance of pairing the most appropriate feature selection strategy with the most appropriate classification strategy when dealing with significantly underdetermined data. This paper also emphasizes differences and similarities between the influence of classification and prediction of prostate cancer. There is another new approach we considered while doing the classification and prediction experiments. Apart from using 7 different feature selection approaches, we have derived new set of attributes by adding all attributes (union), selecting common attributes (intersection) and rest of the attributes (not common).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Narayanan A, Keedwell E, Olsson B (2002) Artificial intelligence techniques for bioinformatics. Appl Bioinform 1:191–222

    Google Scholar 

  2. Narayanan A, Keedwell EC, Gamalielsson J, Tatineni S (2004) Single-layer artificial neural networks for gene expression analysis. Neurocomputing 61:217–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhou Z-H, Jiang Y, Yang Y-B, Chen S-F (2002) Lung cancer cell identification based on artificial neural network ensembles. Artif Intell Med 24(1):25–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Lo JY, Williford ME, Floyd CE Jr (1995) Breast cancer: prediction with artificial neural network based on bi-rads standardized lexicon. Radiology 196(3):817–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bottaci L, Drew PJ, Hartley JE, Hadfield MB, Farouk R, Lee PW, Macintyre IM, Duthie GS, Monson JR (1997) Artificial neural networks applied to outcome prediction for colorectal cancer patients in separate institutions. The Lancet 350(9076):469–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ahmed FE (2005) Artificial neural networks for diagnosis and survival prediction in colon cancer. Mol Cancer 4(1):29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Khan J, Wei JS, Ringner M, Saal LH, Ladanyi M, Westermann F, Berthold F, Schwab M, Antonescu CR, Peterson C et al (2001) Classification and diagnostic prediction of cancers using gene expression profiling and artificial neural networks. Nat Med 7(6):673–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Guyon I, Weston J, Barnhill S, Vapnik V (2002) Gene selection for cancer classification using support vector machines. Mach Learn 46(1–3):389–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fakoor R, Ladhak F, Nazi A, Huber M (2013) Using deep learning to enhance cancer diagnosis and classification. In: Proceedings of the international conference on machine learning

  10. Tirumala SS, Shahamiri SR, Garhwal AS, Wang R (2017) Speaker identification features extraction methods: a systematic review. Expert Syst Appl 90:250–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Snow PB, Smith DS, Catalona WJ (1994) Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer: a pilot study. J Urol 152(5 Pt 2):1923–1926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Djavan B, Remzi M, Zlotta A, Seitz C, Snow P, Marberger M (2002) Novel artificial neural network for early detection of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 20(4):921–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Singh D, Febbo PG, Ross K, Jackson DG, Manola J, Ladd C, Tamayo P, Renshaw AA, D’Amico AV, Richie JP, Lander ES, Loda M, Kantoff PW, Golub TR, Sellers WR (2002) Gene expression correlates of clinical prostate cancer behavior. Cancer Cell 1(2):203–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tirumala S.S, Narayanan A (2016) Attribute selection and classification of prostate cancer gene expression data using artificial neural networks. In: Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, Springer, pp 26–34

  15. Pudil P, Novovičová J, Kittler J (1994) Floating search methods in feature selection. Pattern Recogn Lett 15(11):1119–1125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ververidis D, Kotropoulos C (2005) Sequential forward feature selection with low computational cost. In: 2005 13th European signal processing conference, IEEE, pp 1–4

  17. Kononenko I, Simec E, Robnik-Sikonja M (1997) Overcoming the myopia of inductive learning algorithms with relieff. Appl Intell 7:39–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ahmad A, Dey L (2005) A feature selection technique for classificatory analysis. Pattern Recognit Lett 26(1):43–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Saeys Y, Inza I, Larra naga P (2007) A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 23(19):2507–2517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ververidis D, Kotropoulos C (2009) Information loss of the Mahalanobis distance in high dimensions: application to feature selection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 31(12):2275–2281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Riedmiller HBM, Braun H (1993) Rprop: a fast and robust back propagation learning strategy. In: Proceedings of the ACNN

  22. Tirumala SS, Narayanan A (2015) Hierarchical data classification using deep neural networks. In: Arik S, Huang T, Lai WK, Liu Q (eds) Neural information processing series, vol 9489. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 492–500

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. NCBI (1993) National center for biotechnology information (ncbi) [Online]. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/X76061. Accessed 07 Nov 2015

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

    S. S. Tirumala & A. Narayanan

Authors
  1. S. S. Tirumala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Narayanan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. S. Tirumala.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author(s) whose names are listed above certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tirumala, S.S., Narayanan, A. Classification and diagnostic prediction of prostate cancer using gene expression and artificial neural networks. Neural Comput & Applic 31, 7539–7548 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3589-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3589-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation