Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37072707›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2023

Benchmarking causal reasoning algorithms for gene expression-based compound mechanism of action analysis.

Layla Hosseini-Gerami, Ixavier Alonzo Higgins, David A Collier, Emma Laing, David Evans, Howard Broughton, Andreas Bender

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Framework for Benchmarking Pathway Reconstruction Algorithms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors.

Layla Hosseini-GeramiDepartment of Chemistry, Centre for Molecular Informatics, Cambridge, UK.
Ixavier Alonzo HigginsEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
David A CollierEli Lilly and Company, Bracknell, UK.
Emma LaingEli Lilly and Company, Bracknell, UK.
David EvansEli Lilly and Company, Bracknell, UK.
Howard BroughtonCentre de Investigación, Eli Lilly and Company, Alcobendas, Spain.
Andreas BenderDepartment of Chemistry, Centre for Molecular Informatics, Cambridge, UK. ab454@cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M011194/1
6 · The paper itself

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

Gene Expression ProfilingAlgorithmsGene ExpressionGene Regulatory NetworksMicroarray AnalysisBenchmarkingCausal reasoningL1000Mechanism of actionNetwork BiologyTranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID37072707
PMCPMC10111792

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.