ArticleGenome research2005
Assessing the limits of genomic data integration for predicting protein networks.
Article in Genome research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
74 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Introduction to Network Analysis in Plant Biology.Plant direct · 2025Article
- Computational approaches for the design of modulators targeting protein-protein interactions.Expert opinion on drug discovery · 2023Review
- Identification of copper-related biomarkers and potential molecule mechanism in diabetic nephropathy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- An Early Stage Researcher's Primer on Systems Medicine Terminology.Network and systems medicine · 2021Review
- The STRING database in 2021: customizable protein-protein networks, and functional characterization of user-uploaded gene/measurement sets.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Mapping global protein contacts.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Evolution of In Silico Strategies for Protein-Protein Interaction Drug Discovery.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Network-Based Analysis on Orthogonal Separation of Human Plasma Uncovers Distinct High Density Lipoprotein Complexes.Journal of proteome research · 2015Article
- Article
- Systems biology-based identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis persistence genes in mouse lungs.mBio · 2014Article
- Integration strategy is a key step in network-based analysis and dramatically affects network topological properties and inferring outcomes.BioMed research international · 2014Article
- AucPR: an AUC-based approach using penalized regression for disease prediction with high-dimensional omics data.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- Proteomic approaches and identification of novel therapeutic targets for alcoholism.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2014Review
- Structural bioinformatics of the interactome.Annual review of biophysics · 2014Review
- Computational Prediction of Protein-Protein Interaction Networks: Algo-rithms and Resources.Current genomics · 2013Article
- Genes involved in host-parasite interactions can be revealed by their correlated expression.Nucleic acids research · 2013Article
- Integration of miRNA and protein profiling reveals coordinated neuroadaptations in the alcohol-dependent mouse brain.PloS one · 2013Article
- Proteome-wide prediction of protein-protein interactions from high-throughput data.Protein & cell · 2012Review
- Review
- Article
14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic data integration--the process of statistically combining diverse sources of information from functional genomics experiments to make large-scale predictions--is becoming increasingly prevalent. One might expect that this process should become progressively more powerful with the integration of more evidence. Here, we explore the limits of genomic data integration, assessing the degree to which predictive power increases with the addition of more features. We focus on a predictive context that has been extensively investigated and benchmarked in the past-the prediction of protein-protein interactions in yeast. We start by using a simple Naive Bayes classifier for integrating diverse sources of genomic evidence, ranging from coexpression relationships to similar phylogenetic profiles. We expand the number of features considered for prediction to 16, significantly more than previous studies. Overall, we observe a small, but measurable improvement in prediction performance over previous benchmarks, based on four strong features. This allows us to identify new yeast interactions with high confidence. It also allows us to quantitatively assess the inter-relations amongst different genomic features. It is known that subtle correlations and dependencies between features can confound the strength of interaction predictions. We investigate this issue in detail through calculating mutual information. To our surprise, we find no appreciable statistical dependence between the many possible pairs of features. We further explore feature dependencies by comparing the performance of our simple Naive Bayes classifier with a boosted version of the same classifier, which is fairly resistant to feature dependence. We find that boosting does not improve performance, indicating that, at least for prediction purposes, our genomic features are essentially independent. In summary, by integrating a few (i.e., four) good features, we approach the maximal predictive power of current genomic data integration; moreover, this limitation does not reflect (potentially removable) inter-relationships between the features.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.