Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29941426›Full record

ArticleRNA (New York, N.Y.)2018

Biological classification with RNA-seq data: Can alternatively spliced transcript expression enhance machine learning classifiers?

Nathan T Johnson, Andi Dhroso, Katelyn J Hughes, Dmitry Korkin

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in RNA (New York, N.Y.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Pathway-guided analysis identifies Myc-dependent alternative pre-mRNA splicing in aggressive prostate cancers.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  17. GenomeForest: An Ensemble Machine Learning Classifier for Endometriosis.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nathan T JohnsonWorcester Polytechnic Institute, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Program, Worcester, Massachusetts 01609, USA.
Andi DhrosoWorcester Polytechnic Institute, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Program, Worcester, Massachusetts 01609, USA.
Katelyn J HughesWorcester Polytechnic Institute, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Program, Worcester, Massachusetts 01609, USA.
Dmitry KorkinWorcester Polytechnic Institute, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Program, Worcester, Massachusetts 01609, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3875-9085

Funding

Functional characterization of genetic and post-transcriptional variation using machine learning methodsR21LM012772 · NLM · WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE · PI KORKIN, DMITRY · 2018 to 2019
$353k
NLM NIH HHS R21 LM012772
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is becoming a prevalent approach to quantify gene expression and is expected to gain better insights into a number of biological and biomedical questions compared to DNA microarrays. Most importantly, RNA-seq allows us to quantify expression at the gene or transcript levels. However, leveraging the RNA-seq data requires development of new data mining and analytics methods. Supervised learning methods are commonly used approaches for biological data analysis that have recently gained attention for their applications to RNA-seq data. Here, we assess the utility of supervised learning methods trained on RNA-seq data for a diverse range of biological classification tasks. We hypothesize that the transcript-level expression data are more informative for biological classification tasks than the gene-level expression data. Our large-scale assessment utilizes multiple data sets, organisms, lab groups, and RNA-seq analysis pipelines. Overall, we performed and assessed 61 biological classification problems that leverage three independent RNA-seq data sets and include over 2000 samples that come from multiple organisms, lab groups, and RNA-seq analyses. These 61 problems include predictions of the tissue type, sex, or age of the sample, healthy or cancerous phenotypes, and pathological tumor stages for the samples from the cancerous tissue. For each problem, the performance of three normalization techniques and six machine learning classifiers was explored. We find that for every single classification problem, the transcript-based classifiers outperform or are comparable with gene expression-based methods. The top-performing techniques reached a near perfect classification accuracy, demonstrating the utility of supervised learning for RNA-seq based data analysis.

Indexed as

Alternative SplicingSupervised Machine LearningAnimalsData MiningGene Expression ProfilingHumansOrgan SpecificityRNASequence Analysis, RNARNAalternative splicingclassificationgene expressionmachine learningRNA-seq

Identifiers

PMID29941426
PMCPMC6097660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.