Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26646822›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2015

Integration Analysis of Three Omics Data Using Penalized Regression Methods: An Application to Bladder Cancer.

Silvia Pineda, Francisco X Real, Manolis Kogevinas, Alfredo Carrato, Stephen J Chanock, Núria Malats, Kristel Van Steen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Multi-omics approaches identifyActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Silvia PinedaGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Francisco X RealEpithelial Carcinogenesis Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Manolis KogevinasCentre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL) and Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Alfredo CarratoServicio de Oncología, Hospital Universitario Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, and Servicio de Oncología, Hospital Universitario de Elche, Alicante, Spain.
Stephen J ChanockDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Núria MalatsGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Kristel Van SteenSystems and Modeling Unit-BIO3, Montefiore Institute, Liège, Belgium.

Funding

GENETIC MARKERS OF BLADDER CANCER PROGRESSIONR01CA089715 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ALBERTSON, DONNA G · 2001 to 2012
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS N02 CP011015NCI NIH HHS N02-CP-11015NCI NIH HHS R01 CA089715NCI NIH HHS R01-CA089715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Omics data integration is becoming necessary to investigate the genomic mechanisms involved in complex diseases. During the integration process, many challenges arise such as data heterogeneity, the smaller number of individuals in comparison to the number of parameters, multicollinearity, and interpretation and validation of results due to their complexity and lack of knowledge about biological processes. To overcome some of these issues, innovative statistical approaches are being developed. In this work, we propose a permutation-based method to concomitantly assess significance and correct by multiple testing with the MaxT algorithm. This was applied with penalized regression methods (LASSO and ENET) when exploring relationships between common genetic variants, DNA methylation and gene expression measured in bladder tumor samples. The overall analysis flow consisted of three steps: (1) SNPs/CpGs were selected per each gene probe within 1Mb window upstream and downstream the gene; (2) LASSO and ENET were applied to assess the association between each expression probe and the selected SNPs/CpGs in three multivariable models (SNP, CPG, and Global models, the latter integrating SNPs and CPGs); and (3) the significance of each model was assessed using the permutation-based MaxT method. We identified 48 genes whose expression levels were significantly associated with both SNPs and CPGs. Importantly, 36 (75%) of them were replicated in an independent data set (TCGA) and the performance of the proposed method was checked with a simulation study. We further support our results with a biological interpretation based on an enrichment analysis. The approach we propose allows reducing computational time and is flexible and easy to implement when analyzing several types of omics data. Our results highlight the importance of integrating omics data by applying appropriate statistical strategies to discover new insights into the complex genetic mechanisms involved in disease conditions.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseAlgorithmsCpG IslandsDNA MethylationGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenomicsHumansNeoplasm ProteinsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSoftwareUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26646822
PMCPMC4672920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.