ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2017
Molecular heterogeneity at the network level: high-dimensional testing, clustering and a TCGA case study.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- An overview of statistical methods for biomarkers relevant to early clinical development of cancer immunotherapies.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Gaussian Bayesian network comparisons with graph ordering unknown.Computational statistics & data analysis · 2021Article
- INTEGRATIVE NETWORK LEARNING FOR MULTI-MODALITY BIOMARKER DATA.The annals of applied statistics · 2021Article
- Fast approximate inference for variable selection in Dirichlet process mixtures, with an application to pan-cancer proteomics.Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology · 2019Article
- RAFTSBMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Microbiome Multi-Omics Network Analysis: Statistical Considerations, Limitations, and Opportunities.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Review
- Collective interaction effects associated with mammalian behavioral traits reveal genetic factors connecting fear and hemostasis.BMC psychiatry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationMolecular pathways and networks play a key role in basic and disease biology. An emerging notion is that networks encoding patterns of molecular interplay may themselves differ between contexts, such as cell type, tissue or disease (sub)type. However, while statistical testing of differences in mean expression levels has been extensively studied, testing of network differences remains challenging. Furthermore, since network differences could provide important and biologically interpretable information to identify molecular subgroups, there is a need to consider the unsupervised task of learning subgroups and networks that define them. This is a nontrivial clustering problem, with neither subgroups nor subgroup-specific networks known at the outset.
resultsWe leverage recent ideas from high-dimensional statistics for testing and clustering in the network biology setting. The methods we describe can be applied directly to most continuous molecular measurements and networks do not need to be specified beforehand. We illustrate the ideas and methods in a case study using protein data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). This provides evidence that patterns of interplay between signalling proteins differ significantly between cancer types. Furthermore, we show how the proposed approaches can be used to learn subtypes and the molecular networks that define them. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: As the Bioconductor package nethet. CONTACT: staedler.n@gmail.com or sach.mukherjee@dzne.de. 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.