Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35176023›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Regulatory network-based imputation of dropouts in single-cell RNA sequencing data.

Ana Carolina Leote, Xiaohui Wu, Andreas Beyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Gene regulatory networks in disease and ageing.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Imputation method for dropout in single-cell transcriptome data].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Naught all zeros in sequence count data are the same.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020
    Review
  15. 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

3 authors.

Ana Carolina LeoteCluster of Excellence Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-associated Diseases (CECAD), Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0879-328X
Xiaohui WuCluster of Excellence Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-associated Diseases (CECAD), Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0356-7785
Andreas BeyerCluster of Excellence Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-associated Diseases (CECAD), Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3891-2123

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) methods are typically unable to quantify the expression levels of all genes in a cell, creating a need for the computational prediction of missing values ('dropout imputation'). Most existing dropout imputation methods are limited in the sense that they exclusively use the scRNA-seq dataset at hand and do not exploit external gene-gene relationship information. Further, it is unknown if all genes equally benefit from imputation or which imputation method works best for a given gene. Here, we show that a transcriptional regulatory network learned from external, independent gene expression data improves dropout imputation. Using a variety of human scRNA-seq datasets we demonstrate that our network-based approach outperforms published state-of-the-art methods. The network-based approach performs particularly well for lowly expressed genes, including cell-type-specific transcriptional regulators. Further, the cell-to-cell variation of 11.3% to 48.8% of the genes could not be adequately imputed by any of the methods that we tested. In those cases gene expression levels were best predicted by the mean expression across all cells, i.e. assuming no measurable expression variation between cells. These findings suggest that different imputation methods are optimal for different genes. We thus implemented an R-package called ADImpute (available via Bioconductor https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/ADImpute.html) that automatically determines the best imputation method for each gene in a dataset. Our work represents a paradigm shift by demonstrating that there is no single best imputation method. Instead, we propose that imputation should maximally exploit external information and be adapted to gene-specific features, such as expression level and expression variation across cells.

Indexed as

Single-Cell AnalysisSoftwareExome SequencingGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksHumansRNASequence Analysis, RNARNA

Identifiers

PMID35176023
PMCPMC8890719

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.