ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2020
Exploring Integrative Analysis Using the BioMedical Evidence Graph.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A global literature review of comorbidities and concomitant supportive medications among individuals with Rett syndrome.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Review
- Graphery: interactive tutorials for biological network algorithms.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Informatics Tools for Cancer Research and Care: Bridging the Gap Between Innovation and Implementation.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe analysis of cancer biology data involves extremely heterogeneous data sets, including information from RNA sequencing, genome-wide copy number, DNA methylation data reporting on epigenetic regulation, somatic mutations from whole-exome or whole-genome analyses, pathology estimates from imaging sections or subtyping, drug response or other treatment outcomes, and various other clinical and phenotypic measurements. Bringing these different resources into a common framework, with a data model that allows for complex relationships as well as dense vectors of features, will unlock integrated data set analysis.
methodsWe introduce the BioMedical Evidence Graph (BMEG), a graph database and query engine for discovery and analysis of cancer biology. The BMEG is unique from other biologic data graphs in that sample-level molecular and clinical information is connected to reference knowledge bases. It combines gene expression and mutation data with drug-response experiments, pathway information databases, and literature-derived associations.
resultsThe construction of the BMEG has resulted in a graph containing > 41 million vertices and 57 million edges. The BMEG system provides a graph query-based application programming interface to enable analysis, with client code available for Python, Javascript, and R, and a server online at bmeg.io. Using this system, we have demonstrated several forms of cross-data set analysis to show the utility of the system.
conclusionThe BMEG is an evolving resource dedicated to enabling integrative analysis. We have demonstrated queries on the system that illustrate mutation significance analysis, drug-response machine learning, patient-level knowledge-base queries, and pathway level analysis. We have compared the resulting graph to other available integrated graph systems and demonstrated the former is unique in the scale of the graph and the type of data it makes available.
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.