Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30808299›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

FoPA: identifying perturbed signaling pathways in clinical conditions using formal methods.

Fatemeh Mansoori, Maseud Rahgozar, Kaveh Kavousi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Fatemeh MansooriDatabase Research Group, Control and Intelligent Processing Center of Excellence, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Maseud RahgozarDatabase Research Group, Control and Intelligent Processing Center of Excellence, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. rahgozar@ut.ac.ir.
Kaveh KavousiComplex Biological Systems and Bioinformatics Lab (CBB), Bioinformatics department, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. kkavousi@ut.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1906-3912

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate identification of perturbed signaling pathways based on differentially expressed genes between sample groups is one of the key factors in the understanding of diseases and druggable targets. Most pathway analysis methods prioritize impacted signaling pathways by incorporating pathway topology using simple graph-based models. Despite their relative success, these models are limited in describing all types of dependencies and interactions that exist in biological pathways.

resultsIn this work, we propose a new approach based on the formal modeling of signaling pathways. Signaling pathways are formally modeled, and then model checking tools are applied to find the likelihood of perturbation for each pathway in a given condition. By adopting formal methods, various complex interactions among biological parts are modeled, which can contribute to reducing the false-positive rate of the proposed approach. We have developed a tool named Formal model checking based pathway analysis (FoPA) based on this approach. FoPA is compared with three well-known pathway analysis methods: PADOG, CePa, and SPIA on the benchmark of 36 GEO datasets from various diseases by applying the target pathway technique. This validation technique eliminates the need for possibly biased human assessments of results. In the cases that, there is no apriori knowledge of all relevant pathways, simulated false inputs (permuted class labels and decoy pathways) are chosen as a set of negative controls to test the false positive rate of the methods. Finally, to further evaluate the efficiency of FoPA, it is applied to a list of autism-related genes.

conclusionsThe results obtained by the target pathway technique demonstrate that FoPA is able to prioritize target pathways as well as PADOG but better than CePa and SPIA. Also, the false-positive rate of finding significant pathways using FoPA is lower than other compared methods. Also, FoPA can detect more consistent relevant pathways than other methods. The results of FoPA on autism-related genes highlight the role of "Renin-angiotensin system" pathway. This pathway has been supposed to have a pivotal role in some neurodegenerative diseases, while little attention has been paid to its impact on autism development so far.

Indexed as

Signal TransductionSoftwareAutistic DisorderBiasColorectal NeoplasmsDatabases as TopicFalse Positive ReactionsHumansModels, TheoreticalDifferentially gene expressionEnrichment analysisFormal methodsPathway analysis

Identifiers

PMID30808299
PMCPMC6390332

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.