ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2016
Evaluation of hierarchical models for integrative genomic analyses.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bayesian Approach Integrating Prior Knowledge for Identifying miRNA-mRNA Interactions in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine · 2023Article
- A Bayesian two-step integrative procedure incorporating prior knowledge for the identification of miRNA-mRNAs involved in hepatocellular carcinoma.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2022Article
- Leveraging methylation to identify the potential causal genes associated with survival in lung adenocarcinoma and lung squamous cell carcinoma.Oncology letters · 2020Article
- Identification of miRNA-mRNA associations in hepatocellular carcinoma using hierarchical integrative model.BMC medical genomics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationAdvances in high-throughput technologies have led to the acquisition of various types of -omic data on the same biological samples. Each data type gives independent and complementary information that can explain the biological mechanisms of interest. While several studies performing independent analyses of each dataset have led to significant results, a better understanding of complex biological mechanisms requires an integrative analysis of different sources of data.
resultsFlexible modeling approaches, based on penalized likelihood methods and expectation-maximization (EM) algorithms, are studied and tested under various biological relationship scenarios between the different molecular features and their effects on a clinical outcome. The models are applied to genomic datasets from two cancer types in the Cancer Genome Atlas project: glioblastoma multiforme and ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma. The integrative models lead to improved model fit and predictive performance. They also provide a better understanding of the biological mechanisms underlying patients' survival. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code implementing the integrative models is freely available at https://github.com/mgt000/IntegrativeAnalysis along with example datasets and sample R script applying the models to these data. The TCGA datasets used for analysis are publicly available at https://tcga-data.nci.nih.gov/tcga/tcgaDownload.jsp CONTACT: marie.denis@cirad.fr or mgt26@georgetown.edu SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.