ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2015
Adapting simultaneous analysis phylogenomic techniques to study complex disease gene relationships.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted Sequencing and Meta-Analysis of Preterm Birth.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Informatics and Computational Methods in Natural Product Drug Discovery: A Review and Perspectives.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The characterization of complex diseases remains a great challenge for biomedical researchers due to the myriad interactions of genetic and environmental factors. Network medicine approaches strive to accommodate these factors holistically. Phylogenomic techniques that can leverage available genomic data may provide an evolutionary perspective that may elucidate knowledge for gene networks of complex diseases and provide another source of information for network medicine approaches. Here, an automated method is presented that leverages publicly available genomic data and phylogenomic techniques, resulting in a gene network. The potential of approach is demonstrated based on a case study of nine genes associated with Alzheimer Disease, a complex neurodegenerative syndrome. The developed technique, which is incorporated into an update to a previously described Perl script called "ASAP," was implemented through a suite of Ruby scripts entitled "ASAP2," first compiles a list of sequence-similarity based orthologues using PSI-BLAST and a recursive NCBI BLAST+ search strategy, then constructs maximum parsimony phylogenetic trees for each set of nucleotide and protein sequences, and calculates phylogenetic metrics (Incongruence Length Difference between orthologue sets, partitioned Bremer support values, combined branch scores, and Robinson-Foulds distance) to provide an empirical assessment of evolutionary conservation within a given genetic network. In addition to the individual phylogenetic metrics, ASAP2 provides results in a way that can be used to generate a gene network that represents evolutionary similarity based on topological similarity (the Robinson-Foulds distance). The results of this study demonstrate the potential for using phylogenomic approaches that enable the study of multiple genes simultaneously to provide insights about potential gene relationships that can be studied within a network medicine framework that may not have been apparent using traditional, single-gene methods. Furthermore, the results provide an initial integrated evolutionary history of an Alzheimer Disease gene network and identify potentially important co-evolutionary clustering that may warrant further investigation.
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.