Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24632304›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2015

Combining multidimensional genomic measurements for predicting cancer prognosis: observations from TCGA.

Qing Zhao, Xingjie Shi, Yang Xie, Jian Huang, BenChang Shia, Shuangge Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing 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

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

  1. Statistical genomics in rare cancer.Seminars in cancer biology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Comprehensive evaluation of published gene expression prognostic signatures for biomarker-based lung cancer clinical studies.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 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

6 authors.

Qing Zhao
Xingjie Shi
Yang Xie
Jian Huang
BenChang Shia
Shuangge Ma

Funding

Yale Pathology Tissue Services Shared ResourceP30CA016359 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVID L RIMM · 1985 to 2026
$85.0M
Predicting Adjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Lung CancerR01CA152301 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI XIE, YANG · 2010 to 2014
$1.5M
Novel Methods for Integrative Analysis of Cancer Genomic DataR01CA142774 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI MA, SHUANGGE · 2010 to 2013
$1.3M
Robust rank-based methods and detection of GXE in cancer etiology and survivalR21CA165923 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI MA, SHUANGGE, ZHANG, YAWEI · 2012 to 2014
$421k
Development of Integrated Analysis Methods and Applications to TCGA dataR03CA182984 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI MA, SHUANGGE · 2014 to 2015
$167k
NCI NIH HHS CA142774NCI NIH HHS CA152301NCI NIH HHS CA165923NCI NIH HHS CA182984NCI NIH HHS R03 CA182984
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With accumulating research on the interconnections among different types of genomic regulations, researchers have found that multidimensional genomic studies outperform one-dimensional studies in multiple aspects. Among many sources of multidimensional genomic data, The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) provides the public with comprehensive profiling data on >30 cancer types, making it an ideal test bed for conducting and comparing different analyses. In this article, the analysis goal is to apply several existing methods and associate multidimensional genomic measurements with cancer outcomes in particular prognosis, with special focus on the predictive power of genomic signatures. We exploit clinical data and four types of genomic measurement including mRNA gene expression, DNA methylation, microRNA and copy number alterations for breast invasive carcinoma, glioblastoma multiforme, acute myeloid leukemia and lung squamous cell carcinoma collected by TCGA. To accommodate the high dimensionality, we extract important features using Principal Component Analysis, Partial Least Squares and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (Lasso), which are representative of dimension reduction and variable selection techniques and have been extensively adopted, and fit Cox survival models with combined important features. We calibrate the predictive power of each type of genomic measurement for the prognosis of four cancer types and find that the results vary across cancers. Our analysis also suggests that for most of the cancers in our study and the adopted methods, there is no substantial improvement in prediction when adding other genomic measurement after gene expression and clinical covariates have been included in the model. This is consistent with the findings that molecular features measured at the transcription level affect clinical outcomes more directly than those measured at the DNA/epigenetic level.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Squamous CellComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticFemaleGenomicsGlioblastomaHumansLeast-Squares AnalysisLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteLung NeoplasmsMaleNeoplasmsPrincipal Component AnalysisPrognosiscancer prognosismultidimensional genomic studypredictionThe Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)

Identifiers

PMID24632304
PMCPMC4375393

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.