ArticleCancer informatics2016
Identifying Significant Features in Cancer Methylation Data Using Gene Pathway Segmentation.
Article in Cancer informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modified Needleman-Wunsch algorithm for clinical pathway clustering.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2021Article
- MONTI: A Multi-Omics Non-negative Tensor Decomposition Framework for Gene-Level Integrative Analysis.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to provide the most effective therapy for cancer, it is important to be able to diagnose whether a patient's cancer will respond to a proposed treatment. Methylation profiling could contain information from which such predictions could be made. Currently, hypothesis testing is used to determine whether possible biomarkers for cancer progression produce statistically significant results. However, this approach requires the identification of individual genes, or sets of genes, as candidate hypotheses, and with the increasing size of modern microarrays, this task is becoming progressively harder. Exhaustive testing of small sets of genes is computationally infeasible, and so hypothesis generation depends either on the use of established biological knowledge or on heuristic methods. As an alternative machine learning, methods can be used to identify groups of genes that are acting together within sets of cancer data and associate their behaviors with cancer progression. These methods have the advantage of being multivariate and unbiased but unfortunately also rapidly become computationally infeasible as the number of gene probes and datasets increases. To address this problem, we have investigated a way of utilizing prior knowledge to segment microarray datasets in such a way that machine learning can be used to identify candidate sets of genes for hypothesis testing. A methylation dataset is divided into subsets, where each subset contains only the probes that relate to a known gene pathway. Each of these pathway subsets is used independently for classification. The classification method is AdaBoost with decision trees as weak classifiers. Since each pathway subset contains a relatively small number of gene probes, it is possible to train and test its classification accuracy quickly and determine whether it has valuable diagnostic information. Finally, genes from successful pathway subsets can be combined to create a classifier of high accuracy.
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.