ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021
Using BioPAX-Parser (BiP) to enrich lists of genes or proteins with pathway data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic Biomarkers of Sorafenib Response in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- An Exploratory Application of Multilayer Networks and Pathway Analysis in Pharmacogenomics.Genes · 2023Article
- A statistical network pre-processing method to improve relevance and significance of gene lists in microarray gene expression studies.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Nine quick tips for pathway enrichment analysis.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPathway enrichment analysis (PEA) is a well-established methodology for interpreting a list of genes and proteins of interest related to a condition under investigation. This paper aims to extend our previous work in which we introduced a preliminary comparative analysis of pathway enrichment analysis tools. We extended the earlier work by providing more case studies, comparing BiP enrichment performance with other well-known PEA software tools.
methodsPEA uses pathway information to discover connections between a list of genes and proteins as well as biological mechanisms, helping researchers to overcome the problem of explaining biological entity lists of interest disconnected from the biological context.
resultsWe compared the results of BiP with some existing pathway enrichment analysis tools comprising Centrality-based Pathway Enrichment, pathDIP, and Signaling Pathway Impact Analysis, considering three cancer types (colorectal, endometrial, and thyroid), for a total of six datasets (that is, two datasets per cancer type) obtained from the The Cancer Genome Atlas and Gene Expression Omnibus databases. We measured the similarities between the overlap of the enrichment results obtained using each couple of cancer datasets related to the same cancer.
conclusionAs a result, BiP identified some well-known pathways related to the investigated cancer type, validated by the available literature. We also used the Jaccard and meet-min indices to evaluate the stability and the similarity between the enrichment results obtained from each couple of cancer datasets. The obtained results show that BiP provides more stable enrichment results than other tools.
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.