ArticleBMC bioinformatics2023
Benchmarking causal reasoning algorithms for gene expression-based compound mechanism of action analysis.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Framework for Benchmarking Pathway Reconstruction Algorithms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking EGF signaling pathway inference using phosphoproteomics and kinase-substrate interactions.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Machine Learning for Toxicity Prediction Using Chemical Structures: Pillars for Success in the Real World.Chemical research in toxicology · 2025Review
- Identifying compound-protein interactions with knowledge graph embedding of perturbation transcriptomics.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Abatement of the binding of human hexokinase II enzyme monomers by in-silico method with the design of inhibitory peptides.In silico pharmacology · 2024Article
- MAVEN: compound mechanism of action analysis and visualisation using transcriptomics and compound structure data in R/Shiny.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- On the correspondence between the transcriptomic response of a compound and its effects on its targets.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Using Transcriptomics and Cell Morphology Data in Drug Discovery: The Long Road to Practice.ACS medicinal chemistry letters · 2023Review
- Mechanism of action deconvolution of the small-molecule pathological tau aggregation inhibitor Anle138b.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2023Article
- Dex-Benchmark: datasets and code to evaluate algorithms for transcriptomics data analysis.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Integrating knowledge and omics to decipher mechanisms via large-scale models of signaling networks.Molecular systems biology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundElucidating compound mechanism of action (MoA) is beneficial to drug discovery, but in practice often represents a significant challenge. Causal Reasoning approaches aim to address this situation by inferring dysregulated signalling proteins using transcriptomics data and biological networks; however, a comprehensive benchmarking of such approaches has not yet been reported. Here we benchmarked four causal reasoning algorithms (SigNet, CausalR, CausalR ScanR and CARNIVAL) with four networks (the smaller Omnipath network vs. 3 larger MetaBase™ networks), using LINCS L1000 and CMap microarray data, and assessed to what extent each factor dictated the successful recovery of direct targets and compound-associated signalling pathways in a benchmark dataset comprising 269 compounds. We additionally examined impact on performance in terms of the functions and roles of protein targets and their connectivity bias in the prior knowledge networks.
resultsAccording to statistical analysis (negative binomial model), the combination of algorithm and network most significantly dictated the performance of causal reasoning algorithms, with the SigNet recovering the greatest number of direct targets. With respect to the recovery of signalling pathways, CARNIVAL with the Omnipath network was able to recover the most informative pathways containing compound targets, based on the Reactome pathway hierarchy. Additionally, CARNIVAL, SigNet and CausalR ScanR all outperformed baseline gene expression pathway enrichment results. We found no significant difference in performance between L1000 data or microarray data, even when limited to just 978 'landmark' genes. Notably, all causal reasoning algorithms also outperformed pathway recovery based on input DEGs, despite these often being used for pathway enrichment. Causal reasoning methods performance was somewhat correlated with connectivity and biological role of the targets.
conclusionsOverall, we conclude that causal reasoning performs well at recovering signalling proteins related to compound MoA upstream from gene expression changes by leveraging prior knowledge networks, and that the choice of network and algorithm has a profound impact on the performance of causal reasoning algorithms. Based on the analyses presented here this is true for both microarray-based gene expression data as well as those based on the L1000 platform.
Indexed as
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.