Identification of Novel Biomarkers in Huntington’s Disease Based on Differential Gene Expression Meta-Analysis and Machine Learning Approach
Source abstract
Abstract
Huntington’s disease (HD) is a severe and progressive neurodegenerative disease for which therapeutic options have so far been confined to symptomatic treatment. Currently, the diagnosis relies on the signs and symptoms shown by patients; however, by that stage, the psychomotor issues have progressed to a point where reversal of the condition is unattainable. Although numerous clinical trials have been actively investigating therapeutic agents aimed at preventing the onset of disease or slowing down the disease progression, there has been a constant need for reliable biomarkers to assess neurodegeneration, monitor disease progression, and assess the efficacy of treatments accurately. Therefore, to discover the key biomarkers associated with the progression of HD, we employed bioinformatics and machine learning (ML) to create a robust pipeline that integrated differentially expressed gene (DEG) analysis with ML to select potential biomarkers. We performed a meta-analysis to identify DEGs using three Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) microarray datasets from different platforms related to HD-affected brain tissue, applying both relaxed and strict criteria to identify differentially expressed genes. Subsequently, focusing only on genes identified through the inclusive threshold, we employed 19 diverse ML techniques to explore the common genes that contributed to the top three selected ML algorithms and the shared genes that had an impact on the ML algorithms and were observed in the meta-analysis using the stringent condition were selected. Additionally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was conducted on external datasets to validate the discriminatory power of the identified genes. Based on the results of an inverse variance weighted meta-analysis of the AUCs across both human and mouse cohorts, GABRD and PHACTR1 were identified as the most robust candidates and were selected as key biomarkers for HD. Our comprehensive methodology, which integrates DEG meta-analysis with ML techniques, enabled a systematic prioritization of these biomarkers, providing valuable insights into their biological significance and potential for further validation in clinical research.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases · Mitochondrial Function and Pathology · Fungal and yeast genetics research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Integrative Biotechnology, College of Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Republic of Korea
Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Islamic University, Kushtia 7003, Bangladesh
Department of New Biology, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology, Daegu 42988, Republic of Korea
References (65)
Show source-provided references
1. Huntington’s disease: A clinical review10.1111/ene.13413 ↗
2. Identification of genetic variants associated with Huntington’s disease progression: A genome-wide association study10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30161-8 ↗
3. A novel gene containing a trinucleotide repeat that is expanded and unstable on Huntington’s disease chromosomes10.1016/0092-8674(93)90585-E ↗
4. Huntington disease: Clinical, genetic, and social aspects10.1177/089198879801100204 ↗
5. New Perspectives on the Neuropathology in Huntington’s Disease in the Human Brain and its Relation to Symptom Variation10.3233/JHD-2012-120018 ↗
6. A biological classification of Huntington’s disease: The Integrated Staging System10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00120-X ↗
7. Paulsen, J.S., Long, J.D., Johnson, H.J., Aylward, E.H., Ross, C.A., Williams, J.K., Nance, M.A., Erwin, C.J., Westervelt, H.J., and Harrington, D.L. (2014). Clinical and Biomarker Changes in Premanifest Huntington Disease Show Trial Feasibility: A Decade of the PREDICT-HD Study. Front. Aging Neurosci., 6.10.3389/fnagi.2014.00078 ↗
8. Biomarkers: Promising and valuable tools towards diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of Covid-19 and other diseases10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13323 ↗
9. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group, Atkinson, A.J., Colburn, W.A., DeGruttola, V.G., DeMets, D.L., Downing, G.J., Hoth, D.F., Oates, J.A., Peck, C.C., and Schooley, R.T. (2001). Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther., 69, 89–95.10.1067/mcp.2001.113989 ↗
10. Fit-for-Purpose Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Leveraging the Laboratory Biomarker Experience10.1111/cts.12865 ↗
11. Christodoulou, C.C., and Papanicolaou, E.Z. (2023). Integrated Bioinformatics Analysis of Shared Genes, miRNA, Biological Pathways and Their Potential Role as Therapeutic Targets in Huntington’s Disease Stages. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 24.10.3390/ijms24054873 ↗
12. Chakraborty, S. (2021). Identification of Blood Based Bio-Marker for Huntington’s disease using in-silico gene expression analysis. bioRxiv.10.1101/2021.03.26.437248 ↗
13. The benefits and pitfalls of machine learning for biomarker discovery10.1007/s00441-023-03816-z ↗
14. Lai, Y., Lin, X., Lin, C., Lin, X., Chen, Z., and Zhang, L. (2022). Identification of endoplasmic reticulum stress-associated genes and subtypes for prediction of Alzheimer’s disease based on interpretable machine learning. Front. Pharmacol., 13.10.3389/fphar.2022.975774 ↗
15. GEOquery: A bridge between the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) and BioConductor10.1093/bioinformatics/btm254 ↗
16. Regional and cellular gene expression changes in human Huntington’s disease brain10.1093/hmg/ddl013 ↗
17. Jones, L., Goldstein, D.R., Hughes, G., Strand, A.D., Collin, F., Dunnett, S.B., Kooperberg, C., Aragaki, A., Olson, J.M., and Augood, S.J. (2006). Assessment of the relationship between pre-chip and post-chip quality measures for Affymetrix GeneChip expression data. BMC Bioinform., 7.10.1186/1471-2105-7-211 ↗
18. Selection of novel reference genes for use in the human central nervous system: A BrainNet Europe Study10.1007/s00401-012-1027-z ↗
19. Common mechanisms in neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation: A BrainNet Europe gene expression microarray study10.1007/s00702-014-1293-0 ↗
20. Narayanan, M., Huynh, J.L., Wang, K., Yang, X., Yoo, S., McElwee, J., Zhang, B., Zhang, C., Lamb, J.R., and Xie, T. (2014). Common dysregulation network in the human prefrontal cortex underlies two neurodegenerative diseases. Mol. Syst. Biol., 10.10.15252/msb.20145304 ↗
21. Mutant huntingtin’s effects on striatal gene expression in mice recapitulate changes observed in human Huntington’s disease brain and do not differ with mutant huntingtin length or wild-type huntingtin dosage10.1093/hmg/ddm133 ↗
22. The sva package for removing batch effects and other unwanted variation in high-throughput experiments10.1093/bioinformatics/bts034 ↗
23. Prada, C., Lima, D., and Nakaya, H. (2025, April 25). MetaVolcanoR: Gene Expression Meta-Analysis Visualization Tool. Available online: https://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/MetaVolcanoR.html.
24. clusterProfiler: An R package for comparing biological themes among gene clusters10.1089/omi.2011.0118 ↗
25. Li, X., Li, X., Qin, J., Lei, L., Guo, H., Zheng, X., and Zeng, X. (2025). Machine learning-derived peripheral blood transcriptomic biomarkers for early lung cancer diagnosis: Unveiling tumor-immune interaction mechanisms. BioFactors, 51.10.1002/biof.2129 ↗
26. Shi, J., Chen, Y., and Wang, Y. (2024). Deep learning and machine learning approaches to classify stomach distant metastatic tumors using DNA methylation profiles. Comput. Biol. Med., 175.10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.108496 ↗
27. Rahman, I.R., Soumma, S.B., and Ashraf, F.B. (2022, January 17–19). Machine learning approaches to metastasis bladder and secondary pulmonary cancer classification using gene expression data. Proceedings of the 2022 25th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT), Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.10.1109/ICCIT57492.2022.10054906 ↗
28. Efficient gradient boosting for prognostic biomarker discovery10.1093/bioinformatics/btab869 ↗
29. Ma, Q., Zhang, Y.-H., Guo, W., Feng, K., Huang, T., and Cai, Y.-D. (2024). Machine learning in identifying marker genes for congenital heart diseases of different cardiac cell types. Life, 14.10.3390/life14081032 ↗
30. Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction10.1016/j.csbj.2014.11.005 ↗
31. Lundberg, S.M., and Lee, S.-I. (2017, January 4–9). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
32. pROC: An open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 ↗
33. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package10.18637/jss.v036.i03 ↗
34. Prioritizing GWAS results: A review of statistical methods and recommendations for their application10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.11.017 ↗
35. NetAUC: A network-based multi-biomarker identification method by AUC optimization10.1016/j.ymeth.2021.08.001 ↗
36. A Biomarker-Driven and Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Diagnosing Diabetes Mellitus10.1002/fsn3.70234 ↗
37. Wang, F., Liang, Y., and Wang, Q.-W. (2024). Interpretable machine learning-driven biomarker identification and validation for Alzheimer’s disease. Sci. Rep., 14.10.1038/s41598-024-80401-6 ↗
38. Wang, F., Guo, Z., Tang, W., Cao, W., Dong, X., Xu, Y., Wang, C., Xie, J., Shi, X., and Luo, Z. (2025). Lipidomic signatures as predictive biomarkers for early-onset lung cancer: Identification and development of a risk prediction model. J. Adv. Res., in press.10.1016/j.jare.2025.03.045 ↗
39. Evaluating the comparability of gene expression in blood and brain10.1002/ajmg.b.30272 ↗
40. Cai, C., Langfelder, P., Fuller, T.F., Oldham, M.C., Luo, R., van den Berg, L.H., Ophoff, R.A., and Horvath, S. (2010). Is human blood a good surrogate for brain tissue in transcriptional studies?. BMC Genom., 11.10.1186/1471-2164-11-589 ↗
41. On the outside, looking in: A review and evaluation of the comparability of blood and brain "-omes"10.1002/ajmg.b.32150 ↗
42. Comprehensive literature review and statistical considerations for microarray meta-analysis10.1093/nar/gkr1265 ↗
43. Ramasamy, A., Mondry, A., Holmes, C.C., and Altman, D.G. (2008). Key issues in conducting a meta-analysis of gene expression microarray datasets. PLoS Med., 5.10.1371/journal.pmed.0050184 ↗
44. MetaQC: Objective quality control and inclusion/exclusion criteria for genomic meta-analysis10.1093/nar/gkr1071 ↗
45. Understanding heterogeneity in meta-analysis: The role of meta-regression10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02168.x ↗
46. Huntington’s disease cellular phenotypes are rescued non-cell autonomously by healthy cells in mosaic telencephalic organoids10.1038/s41467-024-50877-x ↗
47. Neurodegenerative processes in Huntington’s disease10.1038/cddis.2011.112 ↗
48. Altered brain neurotransmitter receptors in transgenic mice expressing a portion of an abnormal human Huntington disease gene10.1073/pnas.95.11.6480 ↗
49. Alterations in synaptic function and plasticity in Huntington disease10.1111/jnc.14723 ↗
50. Chen, S., Yu, C., Rong, L., Li, C.H., Qin, X., Ryu, H., and Park, H. (2018). Altered Synaptic Vesicle Release and Ca2+ Influx at Single Presynaptic Terminals of Cortical Neurons in a Knock-in Mouse Model of Huntington’s Disease. Front. Mol. Neurosci., 11.10.3389/fnmol.2018.00478 ↗
51. Electrophysiological and morphological changes in striatal spiny neurons in R6/2 Huntington’s disease transgenic mice10.1152/jn.2001.86.6.2667 ↗
52. Huntington disease skeletal muscle is hyperexcitable owing to chloride and potassium channel dysfunction10.1073/pnas.1220068110 ↗
53. Altered membrane properties and firing patterns of external globus pallidus neurons in the R6/2 mouse model of Huntington’s disease10.1002/jnr.23889 ↗
54. Diaz-Uriarte, R., Gómez de Lope, E., Giugno, R., Fröhlich, H., Nazarov, P.V., Nepomuceno-Chamorro, I.A., Rauschenberger, A., and Glaab, E. (2022). Ten quick tips for biomarker discovery and validation analyses using machine learning. PLoS Comput. Biol., 18.10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010357 ↗
55. Varma, S., and Simon, R. (2006). Bias in error estimation when using cross-validation for model selection. BMC Bioinform., 7.10.1186/1471-2105-7-91 ↗
56. Blood-based CNS regionally and neuronally enriched extracellular vesicles carrying pTau217 for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and differential diagnosis10.1186/s40478-024-01727-w ↗
57. Impairment of learning and memory of mice offspring at puberty, young adulthood, and adulthood by low-dose Cd exposure during pregnancy and lactation via GABAAR α5 and δ subunits10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.09.109 ↗
58. Du, Z., Tertrais, M., Courtand, G., Leste-Lasserre, T., Cardoit, L., Masmejean, F., Halgand, C., Cho, Y.H., and Garret, M. (2017). Differential Alteration in Expression of Striatal GABA(A)R Subunits in Mouse Models of Huntington’s Disease. Front. Mol. Neurosci., 10.10.3389/fnmol.2017.00198 ↗
59. Developmental regulation and neuroprotective effects of striatal tonic GABAA currents10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.02.048 ↗
60. Phactrs 1-4: A family of protein phosphatase 1 and actin regulatory proteins10.1073/pnas.0401673101 ↗
61. Expression analyses of Phactr1 (phosphatase and actin regulator 1) during mouse brain development10.1016/j.neures.2017.08.002 ↗
62. The BDNF-ERK/MAPK axis reduces phosphatase and actin regulator1, 2 and 3 (PHACTR1, 2 and 3) mRNA expressions in cortical neurons10.5582/ddt.2024.01048 ↗
63. Long somatic DNA-repeat expansion drives neurodegeneration in Huntington’s disease10.1016/j.cell.2024.11.038 ↗
64. Common variation in PHACTR1 is associated with susceptibility to cervical artery dissection10.1038/ng.3154 ↗
65. PHACTR1 modulates vascular compliance but not endothelial function: A translational study10.1093/cvr/cvac092 ↗