ArticleBioinformatics advances2022
Towards future directions in data-integrative supervised prediction of human aging-related genes.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current and future directions in network biology.Bioinformatics advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Identification of human genes involved in the aging process is critical due to the incidence of many diseases with age. A state-of-the-art approach for this purpose infers a weighted dynamic aging-specific subnetwork by mapping gene expression (GE) levels at different ages onto the protein-protein interaction network (PPIN). Then, it analyzes this subnetwork in a supervised manner by training a predictive model to learn how network topologies of known aging- versus non-aging-related genes change across ages. Finally, it uses the trained model to predict novel aging-related gene candidates. However, the best current subnetwork resulting from this approach still yields suboptimal prediction accuracy. This could be because it was inferred using outdated GE and PPIN data. Here, we evaluate whether analyzing a weighted dynamic aging-specific subnetwork inferred from newer GE and PPIN data improves prediction accuracy upon analyzing the best current subnetwork inferred from outdated data. Results: Unexpectedly, we find that not to be the case. To understand this, we perform aging-related pathway and Gene Ontology term enrichment analyses. We find that the suboptimal prediction accuracy, regardless of which GE or PPIN data is used, may be caused by the current knowledge about which genes are aging-related being incomplete, or by the current methods for inferring or analyzing an aging-specific subnetwork being unable to capture all of the aging-related knowledge. These findings can potentially guide future directions towards improving supervised prediction of aging-related genes via -omics data integration. Availability and implementation: All data and code are available at zenodo, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6995045. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.