Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34676243›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in molecular biosciences2021

Performance Assessment of the Network Reconstruction Approaches on Various Interactomes.

M Kaan Arici, Nurcan Tuncbag

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Framework for Benchmarking Pathway Reconstruction Algorithms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M Kaan AriciGraduate School of Informatics, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Nurcan TuncbagChemical and Biological Engineering, College of Engineering, Koc University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond the list of molecules, there is a necessity to collectively consider multiple sets of omic data and to reconstruct the connections between the molecules. Especially, pathway reconstruction is crucial to understanding disease biology because abnormal cellular signaling may be pathological. The main challenge is how to integrate the data together in an accurate way. In this study, we aim to comparatively analyze the performance of a set of network reconstruction algorithms on multiple reference interactomes. We first explored several human protein interactomes, including PathwayCommons, OmniPath, HIPPIE, iRefWeb, STRING, and ConsensusPathDB. The comparison is based on the coverage of each interactome in terms of cancer driver proteins, structural information of protein interactions, and the bias toward well-studied proteins. We next used these interactomes to evaluate the performance of network reconstruction algorithms including all-pair shortest path, heat diffusion with flux, personalized PageRank with flux, and prize-collecting Steiner forest (PCSF) approaches. Each approach has its own merits and weaknesses. Among them, PCSF had the most balanced performance in terms of precision and recall scores when 28 pathways from NetPath were reconstructed using the listed algorithms. Additionally, the reference interactome affects the performance of the network reconstruction approaches. The coverage and disease- or tissue-specificity of each interactome may vary, which may result in differences in the reconstructed networks.

Indexed as

heat diffusioninteractomenetwork reconstructionpathway reconstructionpersonalized PageRankprize-collecting Steiner forestprotein-protein interactions

Identifiers

PMID34676243
PMCPMC8523993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.