Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25202135›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2015

Performance evaluation of DNA copy number segmentation methods.

Morgane Pierre-Jean, Guillem Rigaill, Pierre Neuvial

Open access · bronzeAbstract 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Morgane Pierre-Jean
Guillem Rigaill
Pierre Neuvial
Laboratoire de Mathématiques et Modélisation d'ÉvryInstitut des Sciences des Plantes de Paris Saclay · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A number of bioinformatic or biostatistical methods are available for analyzing DNA copy number profiles measured from microarray or sequencing technologies. In the absence of rich enough gold standard data sets, the performance of these methods is generally assessed using unrealistic simulation studies, or based on small real data analyses. To make an objective and reproducible performance assessment, we have designed and implemented a framework to generate realistic DNA copy number profiles of cancer samples with known truth. These profiles are generated by resampling publicly available SNP microarray data from genomic regions with known copy-number state. The original data have been extracted from dilutions series of tumor cell lines with matched blood samples at several concentrations. Therefore, the signal-to-noise ratio of the generated profiles can be controlled through the (known) percentage of tumor cells in the sample. This article describes this framework and its application to a comparison study between methods for segmenting DNA copy number profiles from SNP microarrays. This study indicates that no single method is uniformly better than all others. It also helps identifying pros and cons of the compared methods as a function of biologically informative parameters, such as the fraction of tumor cells in the sample and the proportion of heterozygous markers. This comparison study may be reproduced using the open source and cross-platform R package jointseg, which implements the proposed data generation and evaluation framework: http://r-forge.r-project.org/R/?group_id=1562.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNA copy numberperformance evaluationrealistic data generationsegmentation

Identifiers

PMID25202135
PMCPMC4501247
OpenAlexW2160444889

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.