ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Evaluation of analysis modes for RNA coexpression in single-cell and bulk tissue.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Coexpression of transcripts presents the most common means of computational inference of transcription factor regulation, and is often combined with other data types to infer regulatory networks. With the growing popularity of single-cell approaches, there are questions about how best to extract coexpression information from the data. Recently we reported a simulation study that explored the differences among coexpression performed at different levels: across single cells (xCell, per cell type), across subjects from pseudobulked single-cell data (xSubject, per cell type), or across subjects using bulk tissue samples (xBulk). Here we test predictions made by those models using real data. We consider both preservation (consistency of coexpression findings across different levels of analysis of the same data) and replicability across independent studies, as well as biological interpretability. We find that preservation across levels is limited, indicating the choice of analysis level will affect outcomes. We show that xCell coexpression is more replicable across studies compared to xSubject. xBulk coexpression is dominated by patterns driven by variability in cellular composition and fails to capture much coexpression that is reliably detected at finer resolutions. While all modes of analysis exhibit some enrichment for known regulatory relationships, it was highest with the xCell mode. Finally, we present a case study of the effect of analysis modes on a schizophrenia-associated pattern, reinforcing the importance of analytic choices in the interpretation and replicability of coexpression analyses. Together with our modeling study, this work emphasizes the importance of understanding sources of expression covariation as they relate to the goals of the analysis, and recommend single-cell-based data with biological replicates should be the focus of attempts to infer dynamic regulatory interactions that are more likely to be replicable by others.
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.