Hello
everyone.
Thanks
for
tuning
in
to
my
talk.
I'm
David
Meintrup,
Professor
at
Ingolstadt University
of
Applied
Sciences.
And
today,
I
will
talk
about
A
Lasso R
egression
to
Detect R
isk F
actors
for
Fatal O
utcomes
in
Critically Ill
COVID-19
Patients.
Over
the
last
two
years,
something
started
to
increasingly
bother
me,
and
it
is
not
what
you
probably
think
now,
the p
andemic,
or
at
least
not
only.
The
topic
is
connected
to
this.
This
is
me
giving
a
talk
on
deep
learning
and
artificial
intelligence
at
the
Discovery
Summit
2019
in
the
wonderful
city
of
Copenhagen.
And
since
then,
it
looks
like
AI
has
become
the
universal
tool
for
everything,
so
let
me
give
you
an
example.
In
May
2021,
the
General
Director
of
the
World
Health
Organization
said
the
following:
"One
of
the
lessons
of
COVID-19
is
that
the
world
needs
a
significant
leap
forward
in
data
analysis.
This
requires
harnessing
the
potential
of
advanced
technologies
such
as
artificial
intelligence."
So
to
me,
this
feels
like
a
bit,
forget
about
the
scientific
method
defining
the
goal,
specifying
the
tools,
stating
the
hypothesis,
et
cetera,
Just
drop
the
magic
word
artificial
intelligence
and
you
are
on
the
good
side.
So
therefore,
I
decided
to
give
this
talk
in
the
form
of
a
dialogue
between
an
AI
enthusiast
on
the
left
side
and
a
statistician
on
the
right
side.
And
I'm
going
to
talk
a
bit
more
specifically
on
statistical
models,
artificial
intelligence,
and
penalized
regression.
And
then
in
the
second
part
of
the
talk,
I'm
actually
going
to
present
the case
study
about
the
critically
ill
COVID-19
patients.
So
let's
get
started.
Here's
the
first
question
from
our
AI
enthusiast.
In
the
era
of
artificial
intelligence
and
deep
learning,
who
needs
statistical
regression
models?
Here's
my
short
answer
that
I
borrowed
from
Juan
Lav
ista,
Vice
President
at
Microsoft.
"When
we
raise
money,
it's
AI,
when
we
hire,
it's
machine
learning,
and
when
we
do
the
work,
it's
logistic
regression."
So
I
love
this
tweet
because
in
my
opinion
at
least,
it
condenses
a
lot
of
truth
in
a
very
short
statement.
AI
has
become
a
universal
marketing
tool.
But
for
the
real
problems,
we
still
use
traditional
advanced
statistical
methods.
A
little
bit
longer
answer
could
be
the
following.
If
I
look
at
the
typical
task
of
engineers
and
scientists,
they
include
innovate,
understand,
improve,
and
predict.
And
deep
learning
and
artificial
intelligence
is
mainly
a
prediction
tool.
For
everything
else,
we
still
need
advanced
statistical
methods
like
traditional
machine
learning,
statistical
modeling,
and
design
of
experiments.
Okay,
but
you
have
to
admit
that
there
are
very
successful
applications
of
AI
and
deep
learning.
Well,
there's
absolutely
no
doubt
about
that.
For
example,
predicting
the
next
move
in
a
game
like
chess
and
Go.
The
deep-
learning
algorithms
do
this
way
better
than
any
human
being.
Or
I
would
like
to
introduce
my
favorite
artificial
intelligence
application,
which
is
solving
the
protein
folding
problem.
The
protein
folding
problem
has
famously
been
introduced
1972
by
the
Nobel
Prize
winner,
Christian
Anfinsen,
who
said
in
his
acceptance
speech
that
a
protein's
amino
acid
sequence
should
fully
determine
its
3D
structure.
And
over
the
last
50
years,
this
problem
has
basically
been
unsolved.
And
there
was
very
little
progress
until
DeepMind
by
Google
developed
an
AI-
based
algorithm
called
AlphaF
old
that
to
a
very
large
extent
solved
the
protein
folding
problem.
And
you
see
two
examples
of
this
on
the
right
side.
This
is
very
impressive
and
beautiful
work.
And
I
included
it
here
because
I
wanted
to
clarify
that
this
is
the
perfect
deep-
learning
AI
problem.
We
have
a
vast
amount
of
data,
we
have
a
combinatorial
explosion
of
options,
and
the
result
we
are
looking
for
is
a
prediction,
the
actual
3D
structure
of
the
protein.
So
for
predictions,
we
should
always
use
AI.
Not
at
all.
For
example,
in
the
dataset
that
I
will
present
about
the
critically
ill
COVID-19
patients,
we
want
the
model
to
predict
if
the
patient
will
survive
or
will
die.
But
the
pure
prediction
doesn't
really
help.
If
you
know
someone
is
going
to
die,
what
you
want
is
you
want
to
treat,
you
want
to
prevent,
you
want
to
know
the
risk
factors,
you
want
to
be
able
to
act
and
not
just
simply
predicting
death
or
survival.
So
what
we
need
is
a
really
interpretable
model
that
will
hint
these
things
that
we
need
like
treatment,
prevention,
and
risk
factors.
Another
way
of
looking
at
it,
let's
have
a
look
at
typical
data-
driven
modeling
strategies.
What
is
very
typically
done
in
deep-
learning
AI
environment
is
that
you
take
all
available
data,
you
throw
it
in
the
deep-
learning
AI
algorithm.
And
it
might
predict
very
well
the
outcome
that
you're
looking
for,
but
you're
getting
a
fully
non-interpretable
model.
What's
an
alternative?
An
alternative
is
to
already
in
the
data
collection
process
think
carefully
what
data
do
you
need
with
advanced
statistical
methods.
Then
apply
a
statistical
model,
and
as
a
result,
you
get
a
fully
interpretable
model.
Okay,
says
our
AI
enthusiast,
But
you
are
missing
an
important
point
here.
Statistical
models
might
be
nice
for
small
data
sets,
but
for
big
data,
they
can't
be
used,
right?
Well,
no.
For
large
data
sets,
there
are
several
intelligent
ways
to
reduce
the
dimensionality
before
you
start
with
the
fitting
process
of
the
model.
And
I
would
like
to
introduce,
at
least
shortly,
three
of
these
intelligent
ways
to
reduce
the
model
dimensionality.
Number
one,
redundancy
analysis,
something
you
might
have
heard
about.
If
you
have
a
large
data
set,
the
price
you
pay
is
typically
that
the
factors
are
highly
correlated
and
you
can
measure
the
amount
of
correlation
within
the
set
of
factors
by
the
value
that
is
called
variance
inflation
factor.
And
then
you
can
actually
eliminate
the
factors
with
the
highest
variance
inflation
factors.
Why?
Because
they
don't
add
additional
information
to
the
set
of
factors
that
you
are
already
looking
at.
So
this
is
one
classic
way
of
reducing
the
dimensionality
of
your
data.
If
you
have
categorical
data,
for
example,
you
look
at
an
X-
ray
of
the
lung
and
you
can
see
different
symptoms.
Then
you
can
have
variables
that
describe,
this
symptom
was
there,
this
symptom
was
there,
or another
symptom
was
there,
X
1,
X
2,
X
3.
Maybe
for
your
analysis,
it's
enough
to
distinguish
a normal-
looking
lung
and
a
lung
that
has
some
symptoms
somewhere.
In
other
words,
you
convert
a
row
only
with
zeros
to
a
zero.
And
if
there's
at
least
one
one,
you
change
it
to
a
one,
and
you
create
a
new
variable
catching
this
information.
Or
to
give
you
an
alternative,
you
could
sum
X
1,
X
2,
and
X
3,
and
count
the
number
of
symptoms
that
you
see
on
an
X-
ray.
This
procedure
is
called
scoring
and
is
a
very
efficient
way
of
reducing
dimensionality.
Principal
component
analysis
has
exactly
the
same
spirit.
It
recombines
continuous
variables.
It
takes
a
linear
combination
of
continuous
variables
with
the
idea
of
catching
the
variation
in
one
newly
created
variable.
I
call
these
dimensionality
reduction
methods
intelligent,
because
when
you
apply
them,
you
already
learn
something
about
your
data.
And
that's
the
whole
purpose
of
statistics,
isn't
it?
Learning
things
from
your
data.
So
let
me
summarize
the
advantages
of
statistical
models.
First,
they
can
be
used
for
all
kinds
of
tasks,
not
only
for
predictions.
Second,
the
model
itself
is
useful
and
fully
interpretable.
And
third,
you
can
start
in
a
large
dataset
with
intelligent
dimensionality
reduction
before
you
actually
fit
the
model.
I'm
still
not
convinced.
Can
you
give
me
an
example
of
a
statistical
model
that
you
applied
to
a
large
dataset?
Okay,
so
let's
introduce
logistic
Lasso
regression.
Lasso
is
an
abbreviation
for
least
absolute
shrinkage
and
selection
operator,
and
why
it
is
called
like
that,
I
will
explain
in
a
few
moments.
Let's
introduce
this
Lasso
regression
in
four
steps.
Step
number
one
is
to
remind
ourselves
of
the
logistic
regression
model.
In
a
logistic
regression
model,
we
have
a
categorical,
in
the
easiest
case,
two-
level
factor...
Sorry, a
categorical
response
with
two
levels,
and
we
have
a
goal
to
model
the
occurrence
probability
of
the
event.
This
is
typically
done
with
this
S-
shaped
function
that
corresponds
to
the
probability
of
the
event
actually
occurring.
The
functional
term
is
given
here
to
the
left,
but
the
good
news
is
that
with
an
easy
transformation
that
is
called
logit
transformation,
you
can
turn
the
original
values
into
log
it values,
and
then
the
result
is
a
simple
linear
regression
on
the
logit values.
So
the
bottom
line
is
logistic
regression,
is
simply
linear
regression
on
logit
values.
Step
number
two.
This
is
a
classic
situation
of
a
two-
factor
linear
regression
model.
And
how
do
we
fit
this
to
a
data
cloud?
Well,
we
do
this
with
the
help
of
a
loss
function.
For
example,
we
take
the
sum
of
squared
errors,
and
then
we
look
for
the
minimum
of
this
function.
This
is
the
very
famous
and
standard
ordinary
square
estimator
that
is
the
result
of
minimizing
specifically
this
loss
function
given
by
the
sum
of
squared
errors.
Thirdly,
something
that
is
maybe
less
known,
I
would
like
to
introduce
concept
f
rom mathematics
the
norm
of
a
vector
that
is
actually
just
a
representation
of
the
notion
of
the
distance
of
a
length
of
a
vector.
Let's
look
at
three
examples.
The
first
one
that
you
see
here
in
the
middle
is
the
classic
distance
that
you
all
know
and
use.
This
is
the
Euclidean
distance.
It's
calculated
by
taking
the
squares
of
the
coordinates
and
then
taking
the
square
root.
The
unit
circle
as
you
know
represents
all
points
that
have
a
distance
one,
from
the
center.
This
is
the
classic
Euclidean
norm.
We
can
simplify
this
calculation
by
simply
taking
the
sum
of
absolute
values.
So
instead
of
taking
a
square
and
taking
a
square
root,
we
simply
sum
the
absolute
values.
This
is
called
the
L_1
norm.
And
what
you
see
here,
this
diamond
is
the
representation
of
the
unit
circle
of
this
L_1
norm.
In
other
words,
all
the
points
here
on
this
diamond
have
distance one
,
if
you
measure
distance
with
the
L
_1
norm.
Finally,
the
so-
called
maximum
norm
where
you
continue
to
simplify.
You
just
take
the
larger
value
of
the
two
absolute
values,
x1
and
x2
.
If
you
think
about
what
the
unit
circle
is
in
this
case,
it
will
actually
turn
into
a
square.
This
square
is
the
unit
circle
for
the
maximum
value.
So
in
summary,
we
can
measure
distance
in
different
ways
in
mathematics,
and
what
you
see
here,
the
diamond,
the
actual
circle
or
square
are
unit
circles.
So
points
with
distance
one,
just
measured
with
three
different
norms,
three
distances,
three
different
notions
of
what
a
length
is.
Finally,
let's
combine
everything
we've
done
so
far.
So
we
start
with
the
logistic
regression
model.
We
add
the
loss
function.
And
now,
instead
of
taking
the
ordinary
square loss
function,
we
add
an additional
term.
And
this
term
consists
basically
of
the
L_1
norm
of
the
parameter.
You
see
that
we
add
the
absolute
values,
Beta_1
and
Beta_2?
So
this
is
the
L_1
norm
of
the
parameters
that
we
add
to
the
loss
function.
Of
course,
this
is
just
one
choice.
You
could
also
square
these.
Then,
you
would
get
what
is
called
a
Ridge
regression
if
you
take
the
square
of
the
parameters.
This
first
one
here,
the
top
one
that
we
are
going
to
continue
to
use
is
called
the
Lasso
or
L_1
regression
because
this
term
here
is
simply
the
L_1 norm
of
the
Beta,
of
the
parameter
vector.
Now,
overall,
what
this
means
is
that
you
punish
the
loss
function
for
choosing
large
Beta
values.
And
this
is
why
this
penalty
that
you
introduce
leads
to
the
term
penalized
loss
functions.
So
if
you
have
a
punishment,
a penalty
for
large
Beta
vectors,
then
instead
of
doing
ordinary
least
squares,
you
do
a
penalized
regression.
Now,
let's
look
a
little
bit
closer
to
the
effect
that
penalizing
has.
So
this
is
once
again
the
penalized
loss
function
with
this
additional
term
here.
Now,
the
graph
that
you
see
here
is
independent
of
the
so-
called
tuning
parameter,
Lambda.
The
larger
Lambda
is,
the
more
weight
this
term
has,
and
the
more
it
will
force
the
Beta values
to
be
small.
This
is
why
you
see
that
the
parameters
shrink.
And
this
is
why
this
whole
procedure
is
called
absolute
shrinkage.
Secondly,
in
this
graph,
you
can
consider
this
area
here,
this
diamond
as
the
budget
that
you
have
for
the
sum
of
the
absolute
values
of
Beta.
And
on
these
ellipses,
the
residual
sum
of
square
is
constant.
So
you're
looking
for
the
smallest
residual
sum
of
square
within
the
budget.
This
in
the
case
drawn
here
leads
to
this
point
here.
And
due
to
the
shape
of
this
diamond,
these
two
will
typically
connect
in
a
corner
of
the
diamond.
And
what
this
means
is
that
the
corresponding
parameter
is
set
precisely
to
zero.
And
this
is
why
this
method
is
also
good
for
selection
because
setting
this
parameter
zero
means
nothing
else
than kicking
it
out
of
the
model.
So
this
is
in
summary
why
we
call
the
L
_1
regression
Lasso.
It
has
a
shrinkage
element
and
a
selection
element
due
to
these
two
described
features.
One
last
practical
aspect
of
Lasso
regression
is
about
the
tuning
parameter,
this
Lambda
here.
How
do
you
choose
it?
Well,
one
very
common
approach
is
the
following:
you
use
a
validation
method
like
for
example,
Akaike information
criterion,
and
you
plot
the
dependency
of
the
AIC
of
Lambda.
And
then
you
can
pick
a
Lambda
value
that
gives
you
a
minimal
AIC.
On
the
left
side,
you
see
how
the
parameters
shrink
and
you
can
see
the
blue
lines
that
correspond
to
the
parameters
that
are
actually
non-
zero
while
the
other
ones
are
already
forced
to
be
zero.
I'm
still
not
convinced.
Can
you
show
me
a
concrete
case
study?
Of
course.
So the
data
that
I'm
going
to
present
here
consists
of
739
critically ill
ICU
patients
with
COVID-19
that
was
collected
in
the
beginning
of
the
pandemic
between
March
and
October
2020.
We
have
one
binary
response
that
consists
of
the
levels
recovered
and dead,
and
we
have
43
factors:
lab
values,
vitals,
pre-
existing
conditions,
et cetera.
This
is
the
data
that
we
are
going
to
analyze
now.
So
here,
you
see
the
dataset.
It
has
44
columns,
as
you
can
see
down
here.
And
739
patients.
Now,
let's
start
familiarizing
a
little
bit
here
with
the
data.
We
have
this
last
known
status,
recovered
and dead,
age, gender,
and
BMI.
And
then
we
have
additional
baseline
values,
comorbidities,
vitals, l
ab
values,
symptoms,
and
CT
results.
Let's
look
at
some
distributions.
So
this
is
the
distribution
of
the
last
known
status.
So
you
can
see
that
unfortunately
46 percent
of
these
patients
died.
We
see
here
the
skewed
age
distribution
with
an
emphasis
here
above
60.
And
you
can
see
that
roughly
70 percent
of
the
patients
are
males.
Have
a
look
at
the
additional
baseline
values.
You
can
see
here
the
body
mass
index,
and
you
will
notice
that
we
have
a
tendency
of
a high
body
mass
index
above
25.
We
have
quite
a
lot
of
ACE
and
AT
inhibitors,
and
also
of
statins,
so
treatments
for
cholesterol
and
for
blood
pressure
and
some
immunosuppressive.
Next,
comorbidities.
You
see
that
almost
two-thirds
are
hypertensive,
and
we
have
quite
a
significant
amount
of
cardiovascular
disease,
of
pulmonary
disease,
and
about
30 percent
of
our
patients
have
diabetes.
Now,
for
the
remaining
four
groups,
vitals, l
ab
values,
symptoms,
and
CT,
I'm
going
to
show
you
one
representative
from
each
so
that
you
can
get
a
feeling
of
how
these
values
are
distributed.
This
is
the
respiratory
rate.
These
are
the
number
of
lymphocytes.
So
this
is
a
vital
parameter,
a
lab
parameter.
Here,
you
have
a
symptom,
severe
liver
failure
that
can
occur
on
the
ICU.
And
this
is
a
CT
result,
areas
of
consolidation
that
can
be
seen
on
the
CT
of
the
lung.
Okay,
so
now
we
are
ready
and
we
are
actually
going
to
analyze
the
model.
So
I
go
to
Analyze, F
it M
odel.
I
take
the
last
known
status.
That's
why
I
throw
in
everything
else
as
factor
and
I
go
to
General
Regression
which
is
going
to
perform
the
Lasso
regression.
You
can
see
here
that
the
Lasso
estimation
method
is
already
preselected.
So
if
I
click
on
Go,
the
procedure
is
already
finished.
It's
very
fast,
and
this
is
the
result.
This
is
the
screenshot
that
you
saw
already
on
the
slide.
Now,
I'm
not
going
to
work
with
this
model
for
the
following
reason.
If
I
go
here
up
to
the
Model C
omparison
section,
I
see
that
I
have
30
parameters
in
this
model.
So
this
model
is
still
very
big.
If
I
go
back
down
here,
I
can
see
that
my
AIC
doesn't
change
a
lot
if
I
put
it
further
to
the
left.
Instead
of
doing
this
manually,
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I'm
going
to
change
the
settings
of
JMP
so
that
it
doesn't
take
the
best-
fit,
the
minimal
AIC,
but
instead
the
smallest
within
the
yellow
zone.
So
this
is
something
I
can
do
here
in
the
Model
Launch.
So
I
take
the
Advanced C
ontrol
and
I
change
Best
Fit
to S
mallest
in Y
ellow Z
one.
I
click
on
Go.
And
now,
actually
I
have
a
very
nice
model
with
16
parameters.
Now,
this
is
the
model
I'm
going
to
use.
And
to
be
able
to
show
you
what
factors
are
in
this
model,
I'm
just
going
to
select
them,
Select
Nonzero
Terms.
Now,
I
have
these
16
selected,
and
I
can
put
them
in
a
logistic
regression
and
activate
the
odds
ratios.
So
on
the
top,
we
see
the
16
effects
in
our
model.
And
below,
we
can
see
the
odds
ratios.
So
for
example,
the
odds
ratio
of
age
is
1.07.
If
you
take
this
to
the
power
10,
it
will
give
you
roughly
a
value
of
two,
which
means
that
with
10 years
more,
roughly,
approximately
your
odds
ratio
doubles.
Your
chance
of
dying
is
twice
as
high
as
before.
And
then
below
here,
we
have
the
odds
ratios
for
the
pedagogical
variables.
So
for
example,
coronary
cardiovascular
disease
has
an
odd
ratio
of
1.62.
Now,
I
would
like
to
point
out
some
of
these
results.
So
let's
first
look
at
factors
that
are
well-
known
from
the
general
population.
So
here,
you
see
the
dependency
of
the
last
known
status
versus
age.
And
you
can
see
how
this
increasing
age
increase
your
chance
of
dying
very
significantly.
As
I
said
before,
the
odds
ratio
of
10 years
is
roughly
double.
On
the
left
side,
you
see
pulmonary
disease
and
cardiovascular
disease
that
both
also
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
risk
of
dying
from
COVID-
19.
And
these
factors are
also
valid
in
the
general
population.
Now,
more
Interestingly,
we
find
these
three
factors
not
to
be
in
our
model.
So
gender,
BMI,
and
hypertension
are
not
part
of
our
model.
So
how
is
that
possible?
Well,
it's
critical
to
remember
that
our
population
consists
of
ICU
patients.
They
are
already
critically
ill.
So
we
have
72 percent
of
male
patients,
we
have
almost
80 percent
that
have
a
BMI
over
26,
and
two-thirds
are
hypertensive.
So
these
factors
will
actually
highly
increase
your
risk
of
a critical
cause
of
the
COVID-
19
disease.
But
once
you
are
critically
ill,
at
that
point,
they
don't
matter
anymore.
So
that
was
a
very
important
result
for
us.
Which
factors
carry
over
from
the
general
population
and
which
factors
disappear
in
their
importance
once
you
are
already
critically ill?
Finally,
I
would
like
to
point
out
one
more
aspect
which
is
statins.
Statins
were
entirely
insignificant.
You
see
the
P
value
here
of
25 percent
once
you
looked
at
them
univariately.
But
in
our
multi
factorial
model,
they
were
highly
significant.
And
as
you
can
see
here,
the
odds
ratio
is
below
one,
reducing
the
risk
of
mortality.
So
this
is
a
very
important
lesson.
Sometimes,
people
choose
risk
factors
first
in
large
dataset
by
looking
at
them
univariately.
And
if
you
did
that,
you
would
with
guarantee
have
missed
statins,
because
univariately,
it's
completely
irrelevant.
But
in
our
multifactorial
model,
we
could
show
that
statins
have
a
protective
effect
against
dying
from
COVID-19
once
you
are
critically
ill.
This
finding
has
been
later
confirmed
by
others.
And
just
as
an
example,
I
included
a
meta-
analysis
from
September
21
that
indeed
confirms
that
statins
reduce
the
mortality
of
patients
in
a
very
large
meta-
analysis
with
almost
150,000
patients.
If
you're
interested
in
more
details,
we
published
our
work
in
the
Journal
of
Clinical
Medicine.
I
would
like
to
take
the
opportunity
to
thank
my
co-authors,
in
particular,
Stefan
Borgmann
and Martina
Nowak-
Machen
from
the
clinic
in
Ingolstadt.
And
I
would
also
like
to
thank
you
very
much
for
your
attention,
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
your
questions.
Thank
you
very
much.