Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35269755›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Better Agreement of Human Transcriptomic and Proteomic Cancer Expression Data at the Molecular Pathway Activation Level.

Mikhail Raevskiy, Maxim Sorokin, Galina Zakharova, Victor Tkachev, Nicolas Borisov, Denis Kuzmin, Kristina Kremenchutckaya, Alexander Gudkov, Dmitry Kamashev, Anton Buzdin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mikhail RaevskiyI.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, 119991 Moscow, Russia.
Maxim SorokinOmicsWay Corp., Walnut, CA 91789, USA.
Galina ZakharovaOmicsWay Corp., Walnut, CA 91789, USA.
Victor TkachevOncobox Ltd., 121205 Moscow, Russia.
Nicolas BorisovMoscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 141701 Dolgoprudny, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-1671-5524
Denis KuzminMoscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 141701 Dolgoprudny, Russia.
Kristina KremenchutckayaMoscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 141701 Dolgoprudny, Russia.
Alexander GudkovOmicsWay Corp., Walnut, CA 91789, USA.
Dmitry KamashevOmicsWay Corp., Walnut, CA 91789, USA.
Anton BuzdinOmicsWay Corp., Walnut, CA 91789, USA.
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology · RUInstitute of Bioorganic Chemistry · RUSechenov University · RU

Funding

Applied Genetics Resource Facility of MIPT 075-15-2021-684Russian Foundation for Basic Research 19-29-01108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previously, we have shown that the aggregation of RNA-level gene expression profiles into quantitative molecular pathway activation metrics results in lesser batch effects and better agreement between different experimental platforms. Here, we investigate whether pathway level of data analysis provides any advantage when comparing transcriptomic and proteomic data. We compare the paired proteomic and transcriptomic gene expression and pathway activation profiles obtained for the same human cancer biosamples in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the NCI Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) projects, for a total of 755 samples of glioblastoma, breast, liver, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, and uterine cancers. In a CPTAC assay, expression levels of 15,112 protein-coding genes were profiled using the Thermo QE series of mass spectrometers. In TCGA, RNA expression levels of the same genes were obtained using the Illumina HiSeq 4000 engine for the same biosamples. At the gene level, absolute gene expression values are compared, whereas pathway-grade comparisons are made between the pathway activation levels (PALs) calculated using average sample-normalized transcriptomic and proteomic profiles. We observed remarkably different average correlations between the primary RNA- and protein expression data for different cancer types: Spearman Rho between 0.017 (p = 1.7 × 10−13) and 0.27 (p < 2.2 × 10−16). However, at the pathway level we detected overall statistically significantly higher correlations: averaged Rho between 0.022 (p < 2.2 × 10−16) and 0.56 (p < 2.2 × 10−16). Thus, we conclude that data analysis at the PAL-level yields results of a greater similarity when comparing high-throughput RNA and protein expression profiles.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsTranscriptomeGene Expression ProfilingHumansMass SpectrometryProteomicsRNARNAgene expressionhuman cancer tissueintracellular molecular pathwayspathway activation levelproteomicstranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID35269755
PMCPMC8910457
OpenAlexW4214510178

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.