Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25928379›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2015

Identification of sample-specific regulations using integrative network level analysis.

Chengyu Liu, Riku Louhimo, Marko Laakso, Rainer Lehtonen, Sampsa Hautaniemi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Challenges and Opportunities in Single-Sample Network Modeling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chengyu LiuResearch Programs Unit, Genome-Scale Biology Research Program and Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. Chengyu.Liu@helsinki.fi.
Riku LouhimoResearch Programs Unit, Genome-Scale Biology Research Program and Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. Riku.Louhimo@helsinki.fi.
Marko LaaksoResearch Programs Unit, Genome-Scale Biology Research Program and Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. marko@significo.fi.
Rainer LehtonenResearch Programs Unit, Genome-Scale Biology Research Program and Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. Rainer.Lehtonen@helsinki.fi.
Sampsa HautaniemiResearch Programs Unit, Genome-Scale Biology Research Program and Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. Sampsa.Hautaniemi@helsinki.fi.
University of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHistologically similar tumors even from the same anatomical position may still show high variability at molecular level hindering analysis of genome-wide data. Leveling the analysis to a gene regulatory network instead of focusing on single genes has been suggested to overcome the heterogeneity issue although the majority of the network methods require large datasets. Network methods that are able to function at a single sample level are needed to overcome the heterogeneity and sample size issues.

methodsWe present a novel network method, Differentially Expressed Regulation Analysis (DERA) that integrates expression data to biological network information at a single sample level. The sample-specific networks are subsequently used to discover samples with similar molecular functions by identification of regulations that are shared between samples or are specific for a subgroup.

resultsWe applied DERA to identify key regulations in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), which is characterized by lack of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER2 expression and has poorer prognosis than the other breast cancer subtypes. DERA identified 110 core regulations consisting of 28 disconnected subnetworks for TNBC. These subnetworks are related to oncogenic activity, proliferation, cancer survival, invasiveness and metastasis. Our analysis further revealed 31 regulations specific for TNBC as compared to the other breast cancer subtypes and thus form a basis for understanding TNBC. We also applied DERA to high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGS-OvCa) data and identified several common regulations between HGS-OvCa and TNBC. The performance of DERA was compared to two pathway analysis methods GSEA and SPIA and our results shows better reproducibility and higher sensitivity in a small sample set.

conclusionsWe present a novel method called DERA to identify subnetworks that are similarly active for a group of samples. DERA was applied to breast cancer and ovarian cancer data showing our method is able to identify reliable and potentially important regulations with high reproducibility. R package is available at http://csbi.ltdk.helsinki.fi/pub/czliu/DERA/.

Indexed as

Pathology, MolecularFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGene Regulatory NetworksHumansSignal TransductionTriple Negative Breast Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID25928379
PMCPMC4424448
OpenAlexW2074040158

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.