Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35734767›Full record

ArticleBiology methods & protocols2022

Prediction of risk-associated genes and high-risk liver cancer patients from their mutation profile: benchmarking of mutation calling techniques.

Sumeet Patiyal, Anjali Dhall, Gajendra P S Raghava

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology methods & protocols, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Sumeet PatiyalDepartment of Computational Biology, Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology, New Delhi 110020, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1358-292X
Anjali DhallDepartment of Computational Biology, Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology, New Delhi 110020, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0400-2084
Gajendra P S RaghavaDepartment of Computational Biology, Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology, New Delhi 110020, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8902-2876

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identification of somatic mutations with high precision is one of the major challenges in the prediction of high-risk liver cancer patients. In the past, number of mutations calling techniques has been developed that include MuTect2, MuSE, Varscan2, and SomaticSniper. In this study, an attempt has been made to benchmark the potential of these techniques in predicting the prognostic biomarkers for liver cancer. Initially, we extracted somatic mutations in liver cancer patients using Variant Call Format (VCF) and Mutation Annotation Format (MAF) files from the cancer genome atlas. In terms of size, the MAF files are 42 times smaller than VCF files and containing only high-quality somatic mutations. Furthermore, machine learning-based models have been developed for predicting high-risk cancer patients using mutations obtained from different techniques. The performance of different techniques and data files has been compared based on their potential to discriminate high- and low-risk liver cancer patients. Based on correlation analysis, we selected 80 genes having significant negative correlation with the overall survival of liver cancer patients. The univariate survival analysis revealed the prognostic role of highly mutated genes. Single gene-based analysis showed that MuTect2 technique-based MAF file has achieved maximum hazard ratio (HR

Indexed as

liver cancermachine learningmutation calling techniquesprognosisregressionsurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID35734767
PMCPMC9204470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.