Skip to main content

Table 2 Differences between theoretic and estimated penetrance functions (models by Amato et al. [[14]])

From: Artificial neural networks modeling gene-environment interaction

   

High risk scenario

  

Low risk scenario

 
  

Neural network

Logistic regression

Logistic regression (DV)

Neural network

Logistic regression

Logistic regression (DV)

   

n =1000 + 1000

  

n=1000 + 1000

 
 

Genetic model

40.79

31.31

48.15

48.22

40.85

83.62

g u E g u

Environmental model

46.14

277.11

277.11

52.45

171.61

171.36

Additive model

45.13

256.52

260.10

47.99

163.19

189.92

 

Interaction model

119.77

345.77

247.93

132.47

225.61

194.37

   

n =500 + 500

  

n = 500 + 500

 
 

Genetic model

59.28

47.14

68.22

64.27

92.02

159.80

g u E g u

Environmental model

60.57

277.51

277.15

90.76

174.37

174.16

Additive model

56.10

268.11

297.62

80.66

190.25

242.34

 

Interaction model

138.91

344.50

268.75

153.56

233.16

210.98

   

n = 200 + 200

  

n = 200 + 200

 
 

Genetic model

101.95

85.67

152.25

97.23

167.48

207.66

g u E g u

Environmental model

96.32

278.40

278.93

163.16

177.14

175.27

Additive model

96.16

329.55

374.17

177.24

246.06

292.39

 

Interaction model

168.90

349.88

316.01

207.81

256.22

291.88

  1. Sum of mean absolute differences between theoretic and estimated penetrance function for 100 case-control data sets in the low and high risk scenario for different sample sizes. Bold numbers mark the best model fit comparing neural networks and logistic regression models. DV = design variables.