ArticlePloS one2021
A mixture model to detect edges in sparse co-expression graphs with an application for comparing breast cancer subtypes.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- On Graphical Models and Convex Geometry.Computational statistics & data analysis · 2023Article
- A mixture model to detect edges in sparse co-expression graphs with an application for comparing breast cancer subtypes.PloS one · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We develop a method to recover a gene network's structure from co-expression data, measured in terms of normalized Pearson's correlation coefficients between gene pairs. We treat these co-expression measurements as weights in the complete graph in which nodes correspond to genes. To decide which edges exist in the gene network, we fit a three-component mixture model such that the observed weights of 'null edges' follow a normal distribution with mean 0, and the non-null edges follow a mixture of two lognormal distributions, one for positively- and one for negatively-correlated pairs. We show that this so-called L2 N mixture model outperforms other methods in terms of power to detect edges, and it allows to control the false discovery rate. Importantly, our method makes no assumptions about the true network structure. We demonstrate our method, which is implemented in an R package called edgefinder, using a large dataset consisting of expression values of 12,750 genes obtained from 1,616 women. We infer the gene network structure by cancer subtype, and find insightful subtype characteristics. For example, we find thirteen pathways which are enriched in each of the cancer groups but not in the Normal group, with two of the pathways associated with autoimmune diseases and two other with graft rejection. We also find specific characteristics of different breast cancer subtypes. For example, the Luminal A network includes a single, highly connected cluster of genes, which is enriched in the human diseases category, and in the Her2 subtype network we find a distinct, and highly interconnected cluster which is uniquely enriched in drug metabolism pathways.
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.