Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25009552›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2014

Relevance of different prior knowledge sources for inferring gene interaction networks.

Catharina Olsen, Gianluca Bontempi, Frank Emmert-Streib, John Quackenbush, Benjamin Haibe-Kains

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

5 authors.

Catharina OlsenMachine Learning Group (MLG), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Brussels, Belgium ; Interuniversity Institute of Bioinformatics Brussels ULB-VUB Brussels, Belgium.
Gianluca BontempiMachine Learning Group (MLG), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Brussels, Belgium ; Interuniversity Institute of Bioinformatics Brussels ULB-VUB Brussels, Belgium.
Frank Emmert-StreibComputational Biology and Machine Learning Laboratory, Center for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queen's University Belfast Belfast, UK.
John QuackenbushDepartment of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA ; Department of Cancer Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Boston, MA, USA.
Benjamin Haibe-KainsBioinformatics and Computational Genomics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network Toronto, ON, Canada ; Medical Biophysics Department, University of Toronto Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When inferring networks from high-throughput genomic data, one of the main challenges is the subsequent validation of these networks. In the best case scenario, the true network is partially known from previous research results published in structured databases or research articles. Traditionally, inferred networks are validated against these known interactions. Whenever the recovery rate is gauged to be high enough, subsequent high scoring but unknown inferred interactions are deemed good candidates for further experimental validation. Therefore such validation framework strongly depends on the quantity and quality of published interactions and presents serious pitfalls: (1) availability of these known interactions for the studied problem might be sparse; (2) quantitatively comparing different inference algorithms is not trivial; and (3) the use of these known interactions for validation prevents their integration in the inference procedure. The latter is particularly relevant as it has recently been showed that integration of priors during network inference significantly improves the quality of inferred networks. To overcome these problems when validating inferred networks, we recently proposed a data-driven validation framework based on single gene knock-down experiments. Using this framework, we were able to demonstrate the benefits of integrating prior knowledge and expression data. In this paper we used this framework to assess the quality of different sources of prior knowledge on their own and in combination with different genomic data sets in colorectal cancer. We observed that most prior sources lead to significant F-scores. Furthermore, their integration with genomic data leads to a significant increase in F-scores, especially for priors extracted from full text PubMed articles, known co-expression modules and genetic interactions. Lastly, we observed that the results are consistent for three different data sets: experimental knock-down data and two human tumor data sets.

Indexed as

colon cancerknockdownnetwork inferenceprior knowledgevalidation

Identifiers

PMID25009552
PMCPMC4067568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.