Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30355338›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018

Probabilistic prioritization of candidate pathway association with pathway score.

Shu-Ju Lin, Tzu-Pin Lu, Qi-You Yu, Chuhsing Kate Hsiao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

Shu-Ju LinInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10055, Taiwan.
Tzu-Pin LuInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10055, Taiwan.
Qi-You YuInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10055, Taiwan.
Chuhsing Kate HsiaoInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10055, Taiwan. ckhsiao@ntu.edu.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4905-8484

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan MOST 106-2314-B-002 -097 -MY3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent methods for gene-set or pathway analysis are usually designed to test the enrichment of a single gene-set. Once the analysis is carried out for each of the sets under study, a list of significant sets can be obtained. However, if one wishes to further prioritize the importance or strength of association of these sets, no such quantitative measure is available. Using the magnitude of p-value to rank the pathways may not be appropriate because p-value is not a measure for strength of significance. In addition, when testing each pathway, these analyses are often implicitly affected by the number of differentially expressed genes included in the set and/or affected by the dependence among genes.

resultsHere we propose a two-stage procedure to prioritize the pathways/gene-sets. In the first stage we develop a pathway-level measure with three properties. First, it contains all genes (differentially expressed or not) in the same set, and summarizes the collective effect of all genes per sample. Second, this pathway score accounts for the correlation between genes by synchronizing their correlation directions. Third, the score includes a rank transformation to enhance the variation among samples as well as to avoid the influence of extreme heterogeneity among genes. In the second stage, all scores are included simultaneously in a Bayesian logistic regression model which can evaluate the strength of association for each set and rank the sets based on posterior probabilities. Simulations from Gaussian distributions and human microarray data, and a breast cancer study with RNA-Seq are considered for demonstration and comparison with other existing methods.

conclusionsThe proposed summary pathway score provides for each sample an overall evaluation of gene expression in a gene-set. It demonstrates the advantages of including all genes in the set and the synchronization of correlation direction. The simultaneous utilization of all pathway-level scores in a Bayesian model not only offers a probabilistic evaluation and ranking of the pathway association but also presents good accuracy in identifying the top-ranking pathways. The resulting recommendation list of ranked pathways can be a reference for potential target therapy or for future allocation of research resources.

Indexed as

Genetic Association StudiesProbabilitySignal TransductionBayes TheoremBreast NeoplasmsComputer SimulationFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenetic MarkersHumansGenetic MarkersAssociation studyBayesian logistic regressionCompeting pathwaysDifferentially expressed genesGene-set analysisPahtway scorePathway ranking

Identifiers

PMID30355338
PMCPMC6201593

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.