ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
A comprehensive benchmark study of methods for identifying significantly perturbed subnetworks in cancer.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Framework for Benchmarking Pathway Reconstruction Algorithms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A module-based approach for post-omics, post-GWAS network-based gene classification.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Inferring and evaluating network medicine-based disease modules with nextflow.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Network-based methods utilize protein-protein interaction information to identify significantly perturbed subnetworks in cancer and to propose key molecular pathways. Numerous methods have been developed, but to date, a rigorous benchmark analysis to compare the performance of existing approaches is lacking. In this paper, we proposed a novel benchmarking framework using synthetic data and conducted a comprehensive analysis to investigate the ability of existing methods to detect target genes and subnetworks and to control false positives, and how they perform in the presence of topological biases at both gene and subnetwork levels. Our analysis revealed insights into algorithmic performance that were previously unattainable. Based on the results of the benchmark study, we presented a practical guide for users on how to select appropriate detection methods and protein-protein interaction networks for cancer pathway identification, and provided suggestions for future algorithm development.
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.