ArticleMolecular medicine reports2018
Predicting pathogenic genes for primary myelofibrosis based on a system‑network approach.
Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The profile of genome-wide DNA methylation, transcriptome, and proteome in streptomycin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- The Contemporary Approach to CALR-Positive Myeloproliferative Neoplasms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to predict pathogenic genes for primary myelofibrosis (PMF) using a system‑network approach by combining protein‑protein interaction (PPI) network and gene expression data with known pathogenic genes. PMF gene expression profiles, known pathogenic genes and protein‑protein interactions were obtained. Using these data, differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified between PMF and normal conditions using significance analysis of microarrays, and seed genes were determined based on the intersection of known pathogenic genes and the PMF gene expression profile. A new network was constructed using the seed genes and their adjacent DEGs within the PPI network. Subsequently, a pathogenic network was extracted from the new network, and contained genes that interacted with at least two seed genes, and the candidate pathogenic genes were predicted based on the cohesion with seed genes. Cluster analysis was performed to mine the pathogenic modules from the pathogenic network, and functional analysis was performed to identify the putative biological processes of the candidate pathogenic genes. Results from the present study identified 845 DEGs between PMF and normal conditions, and 45 seed genes in PMF were screened. Subsequently, a pathogenic network comprising 103 nodes and 265 interactions was constructed, and 4 pathogenic modules (modules A‑D) were mined from the pathogenic network. There were nine candidate pathogenic genes contained within Module A and four potential pathogenic genes, including E1A‑binding protein p300, RAS‑like proto‑oncogene A, von Willebrand factor and RAF‑1 proto‑oncogene, serine/threonine kinase, were identified that may be involved in the same biological process with the seed genes. This study predicted 10 candidate pathogenic genes and several signaling pathways that may be related to the pathogenesis of PMF using a system‑network approach. These predictions may shed light on the PMF pathogenesis and may provide guidelines for future experimental verification.
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.