Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25161255›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2014

Fast randomization of large genomic datasets while preserving alteration counts.

Andrea Gobbi, Francesco Iorio, Kevin J Dawson, David C Wedge, David Tamborero, Ludmil B Alexandrov, Nuria Lopez-Bigas, Mathew J Garnett, Giuseppe Jurman, Julio Saez-Rodriguez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

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

10 authors.

Andrea GobbiFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Francesco IorioFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain Fondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Kevin J DawsonFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
David C WedgeFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
David TamboreroFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Ludmil B AlexandrovFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Nuria Lopez-BigasFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Mathew J GarnettFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Giuseppe JurmanFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.
Julio Saez-RodriguezFondazione Bruno Kessler, I-38100 Povo (Trento), Italy, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 102696
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationStudying combinatorial patterns in cancer genomic datasets has recently emerged as a tool for identifying novel cancer driver networks. Approaches have been devised to quantify, for example, the tendency of a set of genes to be mutated in a 'mutually exclusive' manner. The significance of the proposed metrics is usually evaluated by computing P-values under appropriate null models. To this end, a Monte Carlo method (the switching-algorithm) is used to sample simulated datasets under a null model that preserves patient- and gene-wise mutation rates. In this method, a genomic dataset is represented as a bipartite network, to which Markov chain updates (switching-steps) are applied. These steps modify the network topology, and a minimal number of them must be executed to draw simulated datasets independently under the null model. This number has previously been deducted empirically to be a linear function of the total number of variants, making this process computationally expensive.

resultsWe present a novel approximate lower bound for the number of switching-steps, derived analytically. Additionally, we have developed the R package BiRewire, including new efficient implementations of the switching-algorithm. We illustrate the performances of BiRewire by applying it to large real cancer genomics datasets. We report vast reductions in time requirement, with respect to existing implementations/bounds and equivalent P-value computations. Thus, we propose BiRewire to study statistical properties in genomic datasets, and other data that can be modeled as bipartite networks. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: BiRewire is available on BioConductor at http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/2.13/bioc/html/BiRewire.html. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGenomicsHumansMarkov ChainsMonte Carlo MethodNeoplasmsRandom AllocationSoftware

Identifiers

PMID25161255
PMCPMC4147926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.