ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2021
Comparison of approaches to transcriptomic analysis in multi-sampled tumors.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neural crest cell signatures drive tumorigenesis in tuberous sclerosis complex and lymphangioleiomyomatosis.JCI insight · 2026Article
- Clinical significance and functional characterization of RRN3 in gastric cancer: insights from pan-cancer analysis and experimental validation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Defining cellular population dynamics at single-cell resolution during prostate cancer progression.eLife · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Intratumoral heterogeneity is a well-documented feature of human cancers and is associated with outcome and treatment resistance. However, a heterogeneous tumor transcriptome contributes an unknown level of variability to analyses of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) that may contribute to phenotypes of interest, including treatment response. Although current clinical practice and the vast majority of research studies use a single sample from each patient, decreasing costs of sequencing technologies and computing power have made repeated-measures analyses increasingly economical. Repeatedly sampling the same tumor increases the statistical power of DEG analysis, which is indispensable toward downstream analysis and also increases one's understanding of within-tumor variance, which may affect conclusions. Here, we compared five different methods for analyzing gene expression profiles derived from repeated sampling of human prostate tumors in two separate cohorts of patients. We also benchmarked the sensitivity of generalized linear models to linear mixed models for identifying DEGs contributing to relevant prostate cancer pathways based on a ground-truth model.
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.