ArticleBMC bioinformatics2020
Accounting for grouped predictor variables or pathways in high-dimensional penalized Cox regression models.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Two Categorical Gini Correlations with Applications to Classification Problems.Statistical papers (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Efficient Post-Shrinkage Estimation Strategies in High-Dimensional Cox's Proportional Hazards Models.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Development and validation of nomogram models for predicting immune-related adverse events in recurrent and metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with PD-L1 inhibitors.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A CLRN3-Based CD8Biomolecules · 2024Article
- Favoring the hierarchical constraint in penalized survival models for randomized trials in precision medicine.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Article
- Translational Bioinformatics for Human Reproductive Biology Research: Examples, Opportunities and Challenges for a Future Reproductive Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Article
- Complex Disease Individual Molecular Characterization Using Infinite Sparse Graphical Independent Component Analysis.Cancer informatics · 2022Article
- Identification of a Novel Four-Gene Signature Correlated With the Prognosis of Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe standard lasso penalty and its extensions are commonly used to develop a regularized regression model while selecting candidate predictor variables on a time-to-event outcome in high-dimensional data. However, these selection methods focus on a homogeneous set of variables and do not take into account the case of predictors belonging to functional groups; typically, genomic data can be grouped according to biological pathways or to different types of collected data. Another challenge is that the standard lasso penalisation is known to have a high false discovery rate.
resultsWe evaluated different penalizations in a Cox model to select grouped variables in order to further penalize variables that, in addition to having a low effect, belong to a group with a low overall effect; and to favor the selection of variables that, in addition to having a large effect, belong to a group with a large overall effect. We considered the case of prespecified and disjoint groups and proposed diverse weights for the adaptive lasso method. In particular we proposed the product Max Single Wald by Single Wald weighting (MSW*SW) which takes into account the information of the group to which it belongs and of this biomarker. Through simulations, we compared the selection and prediction ability of our approach with the standard lasso, the composite Minimax Concave Penalty (cMCP), the group exponential lasso (gel), the Integrative L1-Penalized Regression with Penalty Factors (IPF-Lasso), and the Sparse Group Lasso (SGL) methods. In addition, we illustrated the methods using gene expression data of 614 breast cancer patients.
conclusionsThe adaptive lasso with the MSW*SW weighting method incorporates both the information in the grouping structure and the individual variable. It outperformed the competitors by reducing the false discovery rate without severely increasing the false negative rate.
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.