ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2018
SigMat: a classification scheme for gene signature matching.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in high-throughput drug screening based on pharmacotranscriptomics.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Harnessing AI to fuse phenotypic signatures for drug target identification: progress in computational modeling.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Identifying compound-protein interactions with knowledge graph embedding of perturbation transcriptomics.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Methods for the analysis of transcriptome dynamics.Toxicology research · 2019Review
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
Abstract
Motivation: Several large-scale efforts have been made to collect gene expression signatures from a variety of biological conditions, such as response of cell lines to treatment with drugs, or tumor samples with different characteristics. These gene signature collections are utilized through bioinformatics tools for 'signature matching', whereby a researcher studying an expression profile can identify previously cataloged biological conditions most related to their profile. Signature matching tools typically retrieve from the collection the signature that has highest similarity to the user-provided profile. Alternatively, classification models may be applied where each biological condition in the signature collection is a class label; however, such models are trained on the collection of available signatures and may not generalize to the novel cellular context or cell line of the researcher's expression profile. Results: We present an advanced multi-way classification algorithm for signature matching, called SigMat, that is trained on a large signature collection from a well-studied cellular context, but can also classify signatures from other cell types by relying on an additional, small collection of signatures representing the target cell type. It uses these 'tuning data' to learn two additional parameters that help adapt its predictions for other cellular contexts. SigMat outperforms other similarity scores and classification methods in identifying the correct label of a query expression profile from as many as 244 or 500 candidate classes (drug treatments) cataloged by the LINCS L1000 project. SigMat retains its high accuracy in cross-cell line applications even when the amount of tuning data is severely limited. Availability and implementation: SigMat is available on GitHub at https://github.com/JinfengXiao/SigMat. 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.