ArticleBMC bioinformatics2020
Comparison of pathway and gene-level models for cancer prognosis prediction.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delineation of molecular subtypes based on pathway activation signatures reveals intrinsic tumor heterogeneity and pan-cancer shared features.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- GRPa-PRS: A risk stratification method to identify genetically-regulated pathways in polygenic diseases.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Development and validation of prognostic models based on cell cycle-related signatures for predicting the prognosis of patients with lung adenocarcinoma.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Systematic assessment of prognostic molecular features across cancers.Cell genomics · 2023Article
- cSurvival: a web resource for biomarker interactions in cancer outcomes and in cell lines.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Survival-related genes are diversified across cancers but generally enriched in cancer hallmark pathways.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- SWAN pathway-network identification of common aneuploidy-based oncogenic drivers.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- Latent Variables Capture Pathway-Level Points of Departure in High-Throughput Toxicogenomic Data.Chemical research in toxicology · 2022Article
- Pan-cancer evaluation of gene expression and somatic alteration data for cancer prognosis prediction.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Pan-cancer analysis of pathway-based gene expression pattern at the individual level reveals biomarkers of clinical prognosis.Cell reports methods · 2021Article
- Exploring Pathway-Based Group Lasso for Cancer Survival Analysis: A Special Case of Multi-Task Learning.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Cancer prognosis prediction using somatic point mutation and copy number variation data: a comparison of gene-level and pathway-based models.BMC bioinformatics · 2020Article
- Construction and Evaluation of Robust Interpretation Models for Breast Cancer Metastasis Prediction.IEEE/ACM transactions on computational biology and bioinformaticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer prognosis prediction is valuable for patients and clinicians because it allows them to appropriately manage care. A promising direction for improving the performance and interpretation of expression-based predictive models involves the aggregation of gene-level data into biological pathways. While many studies have used pathway-level predictors for cancer survival analysis, a comprehensive comparison of pathway-level and gene-level prognostic models has not been performed. To address this gap, we characterized the performance of penalized Cox proportional hazard models built using either pathway- or gene-level predictors for the cancers profiled in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and pathways from the Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB).
resultsWhen analyzing TCGA data, we found that pathway-level models are more parsimonious, more robust, more computationally efficient and easier to interpret than gene-level models with similar predictive performance. For example, both pathway-level and gene-level models have an average Cox concordance index of ~ 0.85 for the TCGA glioma cohort, however, the gene-level model has twice as many predictors on average, the predictor composition is less stable across cross-validation folds and estimation takes 40 times as long as compared to the pathway-level model. When the complex correlation structure of the data is broken by permutation, the pathway-level model has greater predictive performance while still retaining superior interpretative power, robustness, parsimony and computational efficiency relative to the gene-level models. For example, the average concordance index of the pathway-level model increases to 0.88 while the gene-level model falls to 0.56 for the TCGA glioma cohort using survival times simulated from uncorrelated gene expression data.
conclusionThe results of this study show that when the correlations among gene expression values are low, pathway-level analyses can yield better predictive performance, greater interpretative power, more robust models and less computational cost relative to a gene-level model. When correlations among genes are high, a pathway-level analysis provides equivalent predictive power compared to a gene-level analysis while retaining the advantages of interpretability, robustness and computational efficiency.
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.