SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Can Gut Microbiota Be a Good Predictor for Parkinson's Disease? A Machine Learning Approach.

Brain Sci · 2020-04-19

DOI: 10.3390/brainsci10040242PMID: 32325848

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The involvement of the gut microbiota in Parkinson's disease (PD), investigated in several studies, identified some common alterations of the microbial community, such as a decrease in Lachnospiraceae and an increase in Verrucomicrobiaceae families in PD patients. However, the results of other bacterial families are often contradictory. Machine learning is a promising tool for building predictive models for the classification of biological data, such as those produced in metagenomic studies. We tested three different machine learning algorithms (random forest, neural networks and support vector machines), analyzing 846 metagenomic samples (472 from PD patients and 374 from healthy controls), including our published data and those downloaded from public databases. Prediction performance was evaluated by the area under curve, accuracy, precision, recall and F-score metrics. The random forest algorithm provided the best results. Bacterial families were sorted according to their importance in the classification, and a subset of 22 families has been identified for the prediction of patient status. Although the results are promising, it is necessary to train the algorithm with a larger number of samples in order to increase the accuracy of the procedure.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.