ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025
Bigpicc: a graph-based approach to identifying carcinogenic gene combinations from mutation data.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome data from cancer patients represents relationships between the presence of a gene mutation and cancer occurrence in a patient. Different types of cancer in human are thought to be caused by combinations of two to nine gene mutations. Identifying these combinations through traditional exhaustive search requires the amount of computation that scales exponentially with the combination size and in most cases is intractable even for cutting-edge supercomputers. We propose a parameter-free heuristic approach that leverages the intrinsic topology of gene-patient mutations to identify carcinogenic combinations. The biological relevance of the identified combinations is measured by using them to predict the presence of tumor in previously unseen samples. The resulting classifiers for 16 cancer types perform on par with exhaustive search results, and score the average of 80.1% sensitivity and 91.6% specificity for the best choice of hit range per cancer type. Our approach is able to find higher-hit carcinogenic combinations targeting which would take years of computations using exhaustive search.
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.