ArticlePloS one2021
Multi-omic modelling of inflammatory bowel disease with regularized canonical correlation analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Multi-omics time-series analysis in microbiome research: a systematic review.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Pooled it
- Functional genomic mechanisms of opioid action and opioid use disorder: a systematic review of animal models and human studies.Molecular psychiatry · 2023Pooled it
- Generative AI-augmented transcriptomic and microbiome analysis across inflammatory and fibrotic disease states in Crohn's disease.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Review
- Tailoring Multi-omics to Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: All for One and One for All.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2022Article
- Article
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Therapy: Beyond the Immunome.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPersonalized medicine requires finding relationships between variables that influence a patient's phenotype and predicting an outcome. Sparse generalized canonical correlation analysis identifies relationships between different groups of variables. This method requires establishing a model of the expected interaction between those variables. Describing these interactions is challenging when the relationship is unknown or when there is no pre-established hypothesis. Thus, our aim was to develop a method to find the relationships between microbiome and host transcriptome data and the relevant clinical variables in a complex disease, such as Crohn's disease.
resultsWe present here a method to identify interactions based on canonical correlation analysis. We show that the model is the most important factor to identify relationships between blocks using a dataset of Crohn's disease patients with longitudinal sampling. First the analysis was tested in two previously published datasets: a glioma and a Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis dataset where we describe how to select the optimum parameters. Using such parameters, we analyzed our Crohn's disease data set. We selected the model with the highest inner average variance explained to identify relationships between transcriptome, gut microbiome and clinically relevant variables. Adding the clinically relevant variables improved the average variance explained by the model compared to multiple co-inertia analysis.
conclusionsThe methodology described herein provides a general framework for identifying interactions between sets of omic data and clinically relevant variables. Following this method, we found genes and microorganisms that were related to each other independently of the model, while others were specific to the model used. Thus, model selection proved crucial to finding the existing relationships in multi-omics datasets.
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.