Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39773352›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025

Causal models and prediction in cell line perturbation experiments.

James P Long, Yumeng Yang, Shohei Shimizu, Thong Pham, Kim-Anh Do

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

James P LongDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. jplong@mdanderson.org.
Yumeng YangBiomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Shohei ShimizuFaculty of Data Science, Shiga University, Hikone, Shiga, Japan.
Thong PhamFaculty of Data Science, Shiga University, Hikone, Shiga, Japan.
Kim-Anh DoDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. kimdo@mdanderson.org.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Tropism Enhanced Oncolytic Adenovirus for the Treatment of Brain TumorsP50CA127001 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Juan Fueyo · 2008 to 2026
$41.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P50 CA127001NIH HHS P30CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In cell line perturbation experiments, a collection of cells is perturbed with external agents and responses such as protein expression measured. Due to cost constraints, only a small fraction of all possible perturbations can be tested in vitro. This has led to the development of computational models that can predict cellular responses to perturbations in silico. A central challenge for these models is to predict the effect of new, previously untested perturbations that were not used in the training data. Here we propose causal structural equations for modeling how perturbations effect cells. From this model, we derive two estimators for predicting responses: a Linear Regression (LR) estimator and a causal structure learning estimator that we term Causal Structure Regression (CSR). The CSR estimator requires more assumptions than LR, but can predict the effects of drugs that were not applied in the training data. Next we present Cellbox, a recently proposed system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) based model that obtained the best prediction performance on a Melanoma cell line perturbation data set (Yuan et al. in Cell Syst 12:128-140, 2021). We derive analytic results that show a close connection between CSR and Cellbox, providing a new causal interpretation for the Cellbox model. We compare LR and CSR/Cellbox in simulations, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches. Finally we compare the performance of LR and CSR/Cellbox on the benchmark Melanoma data set. We find that the LR model has comparable or slightly better performance than Cellbox.

Indexed as

MelanomaCell LineCell Line, TumorComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHumansLinear ModelsModels, BiologicalCausal inferencePerturbation biologyPredictionSystems biology

Identifiers

PMID39773352
PMCPMC11707890

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.