Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41408313›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2025

A robust workflow to benchmark deconvolution of multi-omic data.

Elise Amblard, Vadim Bertrand, Hugo Barbot, Luis Martin Peña, Slim Karkar, Florent Chuffart, Mira Ayadi, Aurélia Baurès, Lucile Armenoult, Yasmina Kermezli and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

14 authors.

Elise AmblardTIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France. elise.amblard@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr.
Vadim BertrandTIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France.
Hugo BarbotIRMAR, UMR 6625 CNRS, Institut Agro Rennes Angers, Rennes, France.
Luis Martin PeñaTIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France.
Slim KarkarTIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France.
Florent ChuffartIAB, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS UMR 5309, INSERM U1209, La Tronche, France.
Mira AyadiProgramme Carte d'Identité des Tumeurs, Ligue Nationale Contre Le Cancer, Paris, France.
Aurélia BaurèsProgramme Carte d'Identité des Tumeurs, Ligue Nationale Contre Le Cancer, Paris, France.
Lucile ArmenoultProgramme Carte d'Identité des Tumeurs, Ligue Nationale Contre Le Cancer, Paris, France.
Yasmina KermezliTIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France.
David CauseurIRMAR, UMR 6625 CNRS, Institut Agro Rennes Angers, Rennes, France.
Jérôme CrosDepartment of Pathology, AP-HP, Beaujon Hospital, University of Paris Cité, Clichy, France.
Yuna Blum *IGDR, UMR 6290, ERL U1305, Equipe Labellisée Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, University of Rennes, CNRS, INSERM, Rennes, France. yuna.blum@univ-rennes1.fr.
Magali Richard *TIMC, UMR 5525, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, France. magali.richard@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr.

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-22-CE45-0030Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-22-PESN-0013Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale AAP-MIC-2021Multidisciplinary Institute in Artificial Intelligence ANR-19-P3IA-0003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumour heterogeneity significantly affects cancer progression and therapeutic response, yet quantifying it from bulk molecular data remains challenging. Deconvolution algorithms, which estimate cell type proportions in bulk samples, offer a potential solution. However, there is no consensus on the optimal algorithm for transcriptomic or methylomic data.

resultsHere, we present an unbiased evaluation framework for the first comprehensive comparison of deconvolution algorithms across both omic types, including reference-based and -free approaches. Our evaluation covers raw performance, stability, and computational efficiency under varying conditions, such as gene dependencies, missing or additional cell types and diverse sample compositions. We apply this framework across multiple benchmark datasets, including a novel multi-omics dataset generated specifically for this study. To ensure transparency and re-usability, we have designed a reproducible workflow using containerization and publicly available code.

conclusionsOur results highlight the strengths and limitations of various algorithms, and provides practical guidance for selecting the best method based on data type and analysis context. This benchmark sets a new standard for evaluating deconvolution methods and analysing tumour heterogeneity.

Indexed as

GenomicsNeoplasmsAlgorithmsBenchmarkingComputational BiologyHumansMultiomicsWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID41408313
PMCPMC12713266

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.