ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2014
Integrative gene set analysis of multi-platform data with sample heterogeneity.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2014. 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.
- Pan-gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma analysis uncovers the prognostic and immune correlates of ferroptosis-related genes.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Candidate Gene of NOS3, MMP3, AGT, and AGT1R and Pathway Analyses for Platelet Reactivity and Clinical Outcomes of Repeat Revascularization After First PCI in Chinese Patients.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2023Article
- Identification and verification of prognostic cancer subtype based on multi-omics analysis for kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Integrative clustering of multi-level omics data for disease subtype discovery using sequential double regularization.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationGene set analysis is a popular method for large-scale genomic studies. Because genes that have common biological features are analyzed jointly, gene set analysis often achieves better power and generates more biologically informative results. With the advancement of technologies, genomic studies with multi-platform data have become increasingly common. Several strategies have been proposed that integrate genomic data from multiple platforms to perform gene set analysis. To evaluate the performances of existing integrative gene set methods under various scenarios, we conduct a comparative simulation analysis based on The Cancer Genome Atlas breast cancer dataset.
resultsWe find that existing methods for gene set analysis are less effective when sample heterogeneity exists. To address this issue, we develop three methods for multi-platform genomic data with heterogeneity: two non-parametric methods, multi-platform Mann-Whitney statistics and multi-platform outlier robust T-statistics, and a parametric method, multi-platform likelihood ratio statistics. Using simulations, we show that the proposed multi-platform Mann-Whitney statistics method has higher power for heterogeneous samples and comparable performance for homogeneous samples when compared with the existing methods. Our real data applications to two datasets of The Cancer Genome Atlas also suggest that the proposed methods are able to identify novel pathways that are missed by other strategies. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: http://www4.stat.ncsu.edu/∼jytzeng/Software/Multiplatform_gene_set_analysis/
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.