Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40520231›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025

Reference-free deconvolution of complex samples based on cross-cell-type differential analysis: Systematic evaluations with various feature selection options.

Weiwei Zhang, Zhonghe Tian, Ling Peng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 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

3 authors.

Weiwei ZhangSchool of Mathematics Information, Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, China.
Zhonghe TianSchool of Mathematics Information, Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, China.
Ling PengSchool of Mathematics Information, Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Genomic and epigenomic data from complex samples reflect the average level of multiple cell types. However, differences in cell compositions can introduce bias into many relevant analyses. Consequently, the accurate estimation of cell compositions has been regarded as an important initial step in the analysis of complex samples. A large number of computational methods have been developed for estimating cell compositions; however, their applications are limited due to the absence of reference or prior information. As a result, reference-free deconvolution has the potential to be widely applied due to its flexibility. A previous study emphasized the importance of feature selection for improving estimation accuracy in reference-free deconvolution. Methods: In this paper, we systematically evaluated five feature selection options and developed an optimal feature-selection-based reference-free deconvolution method. Our proposal iteratively searches for cell-type-specific (CTS) features by integrating cross-cell-type differential analysis between one cell type and the other cell types, as well as between two cell types and the other cell types, and performs composition estimation. Results and discussion: Comprehensive simulation studies and analyses of seven real datasets show the excellent performance of the proposed method. The proposed method, that is, reference-free deconvolution based on cross-cell-type differential (RFdecd), is implemented as an R package at https://github.com/wwzhang-study/RFdecd.

Indexed as

cell compositionscross-cell-type differential analysisDNA methylationfeature selectiongene expressionreference-free deconvolution

Identifiers

PMID40520231
PMCPMC12162504

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.