Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30181543›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Integration of gene interaction information into a reweighted random survival forest approach for accurate survival prediction and survival biomarker discovery.

Wei Wang, Wei Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Wei WangDepartment of Mathematics, Heilongjiang Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150050, China.
Wei LiuDepartment of Mathematics, Heilongjiang Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150050, China. freelw@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurately predicting patient risk and identifying survival biomarkers are two important tasks in survival analysis. For the emerging high-throughput gene expression data, random survival forest (RSF) is attracting more and more attention as it not only shows excellent performance on survival prediction problems with high-dimensional variables, but also is capable of identifying important variables according to variable importance automatically calculated within the algorithm. However, RSF still suffers from some problems such as limited predictive accuracy on independent datasets and limited biological interpretation of survival biomarkers. In this study, we integrated gene interaction information into a Reweighted RSF model (RRSF) to improve predictive accuracy and identify biologically meaningful survival markers. We applied RRSF to the prediction of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). With a reconstructed global pathway network and an mRNA-lncRNA co-expression network as the prior gene interaction information, RRSF showed better overall predictive performance than RSF on three GBM and two ESCC datasets. In addition, RRSF identified a two-gene and three-lncRNA signature, which showed robust prognostic values and had high biological relevance to the development of GBM and ESCC, respectively.

Indexed as

Gene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticBiomarkers, TumorEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksGlioblastomaHumansModels, GeneticRNA, Long NoncodingRNA, MessengerSurvival AnalysisBiomarkers, TumorRNA, Long NoncodingRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID30181543
PMCPMC6123437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.