ArticleBMC systems biology2017
Estimating genome-wide regulatory activity from multi-omics data sets using mathematical optimization.
Article in BMC systems biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene essentiality in cancer is better predicted by mRNA abundance than by gene regulatory network-inferred activity.NAR cancer · 2023Article
- Identifying genetic regulatory variants that affect transcription factor activity.Cell genomics · 2023Article
- Characterization of cell-fate decision landscapes by estimating transcription factor dynamics.Cell reports methods · 2023Article
- Profiling transcription factor activity dynamics using intronic reads in time-series transcriptome data.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Genetic interactions derived from high-throughput phenotyping of 6589 yeast cell cycle mutants.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2020Article
- Robustness and applicability of transcription factor and pathway analysis tools on single-cell RNA-seq data.Genome biology · 2020Article
- Benchmark and integration of resources for the estimation of human transcription factor activities.Genome research · 2019Article
- Estimation of Transcription Factor Activity in Knockdown Studies.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Systems-epigenomics inference of transcription factor activity implicates aryl-hydrocarbon-receptor inactivation as a key event in lung cancer development.Genome biology · 2017Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGene regulation is one of the most important cellular processes, indispensable for the adaptability of organisms and closely interlinked with several classes of pathogenesis and their progression. Elucidation of regulatory mechanisms can be approached by a multitude of experimental methods, yet integration of the resulting heterogeneous, large, and noisy data sets into comprehensive and tissue or disease-specific cellular models requires rigorous computational methods. Recently, several algorithms have been proposed which model genome-wide gene regulation as sets of (linear) equations over the activity and relationships of transcription factors, genes and other factors. Subsequent optimization finds those parameters that minimize the divergence of predicted and measured expression intensities. In various settings, these methods produced promising results in terms of estimating transcription factor activity and identifying key biomarkers for specific phenotypes. However, despite their common root in mathematical optimization, they vastly differ in the types of experimental data being integrated, the background knowledge necessary for their application, the granularity of their regulatory model, the concrete paradigm used for solving the optimization problem and the data sets used for evaluation.
resultsHere, we review five recent methods of this class in detail and compare them with respect to several key properties. Furthermore, we quantitatively compare the results of four of the presented methods based on publicly available data sets.
conclusionsThe results show that all methods seem to find biologically relevant information. However, we also observe that the mutual result overlaps are very low, which contradicts biological intuition. Our aim is to raise further awareness of the power of these methods, yet also to identify common shortcomings and necessary extensions enabling focused research on the critical points.
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.