Skip to main content
. 2011 Dec 15;12:477. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-477

Table 3.

Cluster-based prediction of phenotypic resistance relative to controls.

With all data RTV NFV ATV APV IDV LPV SQV TPV DRV
CTL1 (Random) % correct 35 36 29 21 22 26 29 31 29

CTL1 (Random) RMSE 1.34 1.13 1.21 1.2 1.05 1.01 1.26 0.98 0.76

CTL2 (Average) % correct 46 43 62 60 62 56 57 47 34

CTL2 (Average) RMSE 0.60 0.54 0.36 0.34 0.26 0.28 0.41 0.67 0.67

Cluster-based % correct 81 75 74 70 63 67 65 50 67

Cluster-based RMSE 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.33 0.29 0.25 0.50 0.71 0.29

Without nonresistant clusters RTV NFV ATV APV IDV LPV SQV TPV DRV

CTL1 (Random) % correct 78 66 45 27 22 29 34 18 29

CTL1 (Random) RMSE 0.54 0.68 0.84 0.97 0.86 0.83 1.06 1.00 0.74

CTL2 (Average) % correct 28 32 49 51 52 43 46 28 11

CTL2 (Average) RMSE 0.74 0.64 0.45 0.41 0.32 0.34 0.51 0.84 0.84

Cluster-based % correct 89 82 73 62 55 58 60 34 56

Cluster-based RMSE 0.26 0.23 0.38 0.40 0.36 0.31 0.62 0.89 0.36

Percent of viruses whose resistance score toward each drug was correctly classified ("% correct"), as well as the RMS error (in scaled resistance units) over all sequences of the phenotypic difference between predicted and actual phenotype ("RMSE") using the two controls described in the text ("CTL1 (Random)" and "CTL2 (Average)" and the cluster-based prediction. The top panel presents results using all 398 sequences, and the bottom panel shows results after removing the two clusters showing little or no phenotypic resistance to any drug.