Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31001651›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany)2019

Random gene sets in predicting survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Timo Itzel, Rainer Spang, Thorsten Maass, Stefan Munker, Stephanie Roessler, Matthias P Ebert, Hans J Schlitt, Wolfgang Herr, Matthias Evert, Andreas Teufel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Timo ItzelDivision of Hepatology & Division of Clinical Bioinformatics, Department of Medicine II, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Rainer SpangStatistical Bioinformatics, Department of Functional Genomics, University Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Thorsten MaassHepacult GmbH, Regensburg, Germany.
Stefan MunkerDepartment of Medicine II, Großhadern University Medical Center, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Stephanie RoesslerInstitute of Pathology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Matthias P EbertDepartment of Medicine II, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hans J SchlittDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Wolfgang HerrDepartment of Medicine III, University Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Matthias EvertDepartment of Pathology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Andreas TeufelDivision of Hepatology & Division of Clinical Bioinformatics, Department of Medicine II, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. andreas.teufel@medma.uni-heidelberg.de.
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Hospital Regensburg · DEUniversity of Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite multiple publications, molecular signatures predicting the course of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have not yet been integrated into clinical routine decision-making. Given the diversity of published signatures, optimal number, best combinations, and benefit of functional associations of genes in prognostic signatures remain to be defined. We investigated a vast number of randomly chosen gene sets (varying between 1 and 10,000 genes) to encompass the full range of prognostic gene sets on 242 transcriptomic profiles of patients with HCC. Depending on the selected size, 4.7 to 23.5% of all random gene sets exhibit prognostic potential by separating patient subgroups with significantly diverse survival. This was further substantiated by investigating gene sets and signaling pathways also resulting in a comparable high number of significantly prognostic gene sets. However, combining multiple random gene sets using "swarm intelligence" resulted in a significantly improved predictability for approximately 63% of all patients. In these patients, approx. 70% of all random 50-gene containing gene sets resulted in equal and stable prediction of survival. For all other patients, a reliable prediction seems highly unlikely for any selected gene set. Using a machine learning and independent validation approach, we demonstrated a high reliability of random gene sets and swarm intelligence in HCC prognosis. Ultimately, these findings were validated in two independent patient cohorts and independent technical platforms (microarray, RNASeq). In conclusion, we demonstrate that using "swarm intelligence" of multiple gene sets for prognosis prediction may not only be superior but also more robust for predictive purposes. KEY MESSAGES: Molecular signatures predicting HCC have not yet been integrated into clinical routine Depending on the selected size, 4.7 to 23.5% of all random gene sets exhibit prognostic potential; independent of the technical platform (microarray, RNASeq) Using "swarm intelligence" resulted in a significantly improved predictability In these patients, approx. 70% of all random 50-gene containing gene sets resulted in equal and stable prediction of survival Overall, "swarm intelligence" is superior and more robust for predictive purposes in HCC.

Indexed as

Genes, NeoplasmCarcinoma, HepatocellularCluster AnalysisCohort StudiesDatabases, GeneticGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGene OntologyHumansLiver NeoplasmsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsSignal TransductionSurvival AnalysisBioinformaticsGene setHCCLiver cancerMicroarrayProfilingPrognosticRandomRNA SeqSignatureSwarm intelligenceTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID31001651
OpenAlexW2937240702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.