Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35379892›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2022

Bayesian networks elucidate complex genomic landscapes in cancer.

Nicos Angelopoulos, Aikaterini Chatzipli, Jyoti Nangalia, Francesco Maura, Peter J Campbell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Bayesian networks for network inference in biology.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025
    Review
  5. The Use of AI for Phenotype-Genotype Mapping.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicos AngelopoulosThe Cancer, Ageing and Somatic Mutation Programme, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, CB10 1SA, UK. angelopoulosn@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7507-9177
Aikaterini ChatzipliThe Cancer, Ageing and Somatic Mutation Programme, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, CB10 1SA, UK.
Jyoti NangaliaThe Cancer, Ageing and Somatic Mutation Programme, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, CB10 1SA, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7122-4608
Francesco MauraMyeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5017-1620
Peter J CampbellThe Cancer, Ageing and Somatic Mutation Programme, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, CB10 1SA, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3921-0510
Wellcome Sanger Institute · GBUniversity of Miami · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bayesian networks (BNs) are disciplined, explainable Artificial Intelligence models that can describe structured joint probability spaces. In the context of understanding complex relations between a number of variables in biological settings, they can be constructed from observed data and can provide a guiding, graphical tool in exploring such relations. Here we propose BNs for elucidating the relations between driver events in large cancer genomic datasets. We present a methodology that is specifically tailored to biologists and clinicians as they are the main producers of such datasets. We achieve this by using an optimal BN learning algorithm based on well established likelihood functions and by utilising just two tuning parameters, both of which are easy to set and have intuitive readings. To enhance value to clinicians, we introduce (a) the use of heatmaps for families in each network, and (b) visualising pairwise co-occurrence statistics on the network. For binary data, an optional step of fitting logic gates can be employed. We show how our methodology enhances pairwise testing and how biologists and clinicians can use BNs for discussing the main relations among driver events in large genomic cohorts. We demonstrate the utility of our methodology by applying it to 5 cancer datasets revealing complex genomic landscapes. Our networks identify central patterns in all datasets including a central 4-way mutual exclusivity between HDR, t(4,14), t(11,14) and t(14,16) in myeloma, and a 3-way mutual exclusivity of three major players: CALR, JAK2 and MPL, in myeloproliferative neoplasms. These analyses demonstrate that our methodology can play a central role in the study of large genomic cancer datasets.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNeoplasmsAlgorithmsBayes TheoremGenomicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID35379892
PMCPMC8980036
OpenAlexW4224311951

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.