ArticleGene expression2012
Computational approaches for identifying cancer miRNA expressions.
Article in Gene expression, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unveiling Novel Arginase Inhibitors for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Using Drug Repurposing and Virtual Screening Approaches.Journal of cellular biochemistry · 2025Article
- XGBMUT: Predicting the Functional Impact of Missense Mutations Using an Extreme Gradient Boost Classifier.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Identifying relevant group of miRNAs in cancer using fuzzy mutual information.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2016Article
- MicroRNA-365 inhibits growth, invasion and metastasis of malignant melanoma by targeting NRP1 expression.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play a major role in cancer development and also act as a key factor in many other diseases. In this investigation, we propose three methods for handling miRNA expressions. The first two methods determine whether a miRNA is indicating normal or cancer condition, and the third one determines how many miRNAs are supporting the cancer sample/patient. While Method 1 acts as a two-class classifier and is based on normalized average expression value, Method 2 also does the same and is based on the normalized average intraclass distance. Method 3 checks whether a miRNA belongs to the cancer class or not, provides the percentage of supporting miRNAs for a cancer patient, and is based on weighted normalized average intraclass distance. The values of the weights are determined using exhaustive search by maximizing the accuracy in training samples. The proposed methods are tested on the differentially regulated miRNAs in three types of cancers (breast, colon, and melanoma cancer). The performances of Method 1 and Method 2 are evaluated by F score, Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC), and plotting "1--specificity versus sensitivity" in Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) space and are found to be superior to the kNN and SVM classifiers for breast, colon, and melanoma cancer data sets. It is also observed that both the sensitivity and the specificity of Method 1 and Method 2 are higher than 0.5. For the same data sets, Method 3 achieved an average accuracy of more than 98% in detecting the miRNAs, supporting the cancer condition.
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.