ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2021
'Single-subject studies'-derived analyses unveil altered biomechanisms between very small cohorts: implications for rare diseases.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2021. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing validation of case-control omics signatures through "minimalist" single-subject analysis (N-of-1 trials): proof of concept in sepsis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Paired-Sample and Pathway-Anchored MLOps Framework for Robust Transcriptomic Machine Learning in Small Cohorts: Model Classification Study.JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Accounting for extra-binomial variability with differentially expressed genetic pathway data: a collaborative bioinformatic study.Stat (International Statistical Institute)Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
motivationIdentifying altered transcripts between very small human cohorts is particularly challenging and is compounded by the low accrual rate of human subjects in rare diseases or sub-stratified common disorders. Yet, single-subject studies (S3) can compare paired transcriptome samples drawn from the same patient under two conditions (e.g. treated versus pre-treatment) and suggest patient-specific responsive biomechanisms based on the overrepresentation of functionally defined gene sets. These improve statistical power by: (i) reducing the total features tested and (ii) relaxing the requirement of within-cohort uniformity at the transcript level. We propose Inter-N-of-1, a novel method, to identify meaningful differences between very small cohorts by using the effect size of 'single-subject-study'-derived responsive biological mechanisms.
resultsIn each subject, Inter-N-of-1 requires applying previously published S3-type N-of-1-pathways MixEnrich to two paired samples (e.g. diseased versus unaffected tissues) for determining patient-specific enriched genes sets: Odds Ratios (S3-OR) and S3-variance using Gene Ontology Biological Processes. To evaluate small cohorts, we calculated the precision and recall of Inter-N-of-1 and that of a control method (GLM+EGS) when comparing two cohorts of decreasing sizes (from 20 versus 20 to 2 versus 2) in a comprehensive six-parameter simulation and in a proof-of-concept clinical dataset. In simulations, the Inter-N-of-1 median precision and recall are > 90% and >75% in cohorts of 3 versus 3 distinct subjects (regardless of the parameter values), whereas conventional methods outperform Inter-N-of-1 at sample sizes 9 versus 9 and larger. Similar results were obtained in the clinical proof-of-concept dataset. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: R software is available at Lussierlab.net/BSSD.
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.