ArticleBMC genomics2009
A network-based integrative approach to prioritize reliable hits from multiple genome-wide RNAi screens in Drosophila.
Article in BMC genomics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- A network embedding approach to identify active modules in biological interaction networks.Life science alliance · 2023Article
- The Drp1-Mediated Mitochondrial Fission Protein Interactome as an Emerging Core Player in Mitochondrial Dynamics and Cardiovascular Disease Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Temporal and sequential order of nonoverlapping gene networks unraveled in mated female Drosophila.Life science alliance · 2022Article
- Review
- SIGNAL: A web-based iterative analysis platform integrating pathway and network approaches optimizes hit selection from genome-scale assays.Cell systems · 2021Article
- MasterPATH: network analysis of functional genomics screening data.BMC genomics · 2020Article
- Host factor prioritization for pan-viral genetic perturbation screens using random intercept models and network propagation.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Incorporating interaction networks into the determination of functionally related hit genes in genomic experiments with Markov random fields.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
- MEDICI: Mining Essentiality Data to Identify Critical Interactions for Cancer Drug Target Discovery and Development.PloS one · 2017Article
- HTS-Net: An integrated regulome-interactome approach for establishing network regulation models in high-throughput screenings.PloS one · 2017Article
- Long-Term Memory in Drosophila Is Influenced by Histone Deacetylase HDAC4 Interacting with SUMO-Conjugating Enzyme Ubc9.Genetics · 2016Article
- A combined binary interaction and phenotypic map of C. elegans cell polarity proteins.Nature cell biology · 2016Article
- Network analysis of gene essentiality in functional genomics experiments.Genome biology · 2015Article
- Revealing molecular mechanisms by integrating high-dimensional functional screens with protein interaction data.PLoS computational biology · 2014Article
- Integrative approaches for predicting protein function and prioritizing genes for complex phenotypes using protein interaction networks.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Article
- High-throughput RNA interference screens integrative analysis: Towards a comprehensive understanding of the virus-host interplay.World journal of virology · 2013Review
- Article
- DroPNet: a web portal for integrated analysis of Drosophila protein-protein interaction networks.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
- FlyRNAi.org--the database of the Drosophila RNAi screening center: 2012 update.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe recently developed RNA interference (RNAi) technology has created an unprecedented opportunity which allows the function of individual genes in whole organisms or cell lines to be interrogated at genome-wide scale. However, multiple issues, such as off-target effects or low efficacies in knocking down certain genes, have produced RNAi screening results that are often noisy and that potentially yield both high rates of false positives and false negatives. Therefore, integrating RNAi screening results with other information, such as protein-protein interaction (PPI), may help to address these issues.
resultsBy analyzing 24 genome-wide RNAi screens interrogating various biological processes in Drosophila, we found that RNAi positive hits were significantly more connected to each other when analyzed within a protein-protein interaction network, as opposed to random cases, for nearly all screens. Based on this finding, we developed a network-based approach to identify false positives (FPs) and false negatives (FNs) in these screening results. This approach relied on a scoring function, which we termed NePhe, to integrate information obtained from both PPI network and RNAi screening results. Using a novel rank-based test, we compared the performance of different NePhe scoring functions and found that diffusion kernel-based methods generally outperformed others, such as direct neighbor-based methods. Using two genome-wide RNAi screens as examples, we validated our approach extensively from multiple aspects. We prioritized hits in the original screens that were more likely to be reproduced by the validation screen and recovered potential FNs whose involvements in the biological process were suggested by previous knowledge and mutant phenotypes. Finally, we demonstrated that the NePhe scoring system helped to biologically interpret RNAi results at the module level.
conclusionBy comprehensively analyzing multiple genome-wide RNAi screens, we conclude that network information can be effectively integrated with RNAi results to produce suggestive FPs and FNs, and to bring biological insight to the screening results.
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.