Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23547110›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2013

Pathway-based personalized analysis of cancer.

Yotam Drier, Michal Sheffer, Eytan Domany

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 183 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
183citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

183 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

123 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yotam DrierDepartment of Physics of Complex Systems, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel.
Michal Sheffer
Eytan Domany

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We introduce Pathifier, an algorithm that infers pathway deregulation scores for each tumor sample on the basis of expression data. This score is determined, in a context-specific manner, for every particular dataset and type of cancer that is being investigated. The algorithm transforms gene-level information into pathway-level information, generating a compact and biologically relevant representation of each sample. We demonstrate the algorithm's performance on three colorectal cancer datasets and two glioblastoma multiforme datasets and show that our multipathway-based representation is reproducible, preserves much of the original information, and allows inference of complex biologically significant information. We discovered several pathways that were significantly associated with survival of glioblastoma patients and two whose scores are predictive of survival in colorectal cancer: CXCR3-mediated signaling and oxidative phosphorylation. We also identified a subclass of proneural and neural glioblastoma with significantly better survival, and an EGF receptor-deregulated subclass of colon cancers.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSoftwareColorectal NeoplasmsComputational BiologyGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenomicsGlioblastomaHumansNeoplasmsOxidative PhosphorylationPrecision MedicineReceptors, CXCR3Reproducibility of ResultsSignal TransductionSystems BiologyCXCR3 protein, humanReceptors, CXCR3

Identifiers

PMID23547110
PMCPMC3631698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.