ArticlePloS one2017
Estimation of the proteomic cancer co-expression sub networks by using association estimators.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- k- Strong Inference Algorithm: A Hybrid Information Theory Based Gene Network Inference Algorithm.Molecular biotechnology · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the association estimators, which have significant influences on the gene network inference methods and used for determining the molecular interactions, were examined within the co-expression network inference concept. By using the proteomic data from five different cancer types, the hub genes/proteins within the disease-associated gene-gene/protein-protein interaction sub networks were identified. Proteomic data from various cancer types is collected from The Cancer Proteome Atlas (TCPA). Correlation and mutual information (MI) based nine association estimators that are commonly used in the literature, were compared in this study. As the gold standard to measure the association estimators' performance, a multi-layer data integration platform on gene-disease associations (DisGeNET) and the Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB) was used. Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate the performance of the association estimators by comparing the created co-expression networks with the disease-associated pathways. It was observed that the MI based estimators provided more successful results than the Pearson and Spearman correlation approaches, which are used in the estimation of biological networks in the weighted correlation network analysis (WGCNA) package. In correlation-based methods, the best average success rate for five cancer types was 60%, while in MI-based methods the average success ratio was 71% for James-Stein Shrinkage (Shrink) and 64% for Schurmann-Grassberger (SG) association estimator, respectively. Moreover, the hub genes and the inferred sub networks are presented for the consideration of researchers and experimentalists.
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.