Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

A critical comparison of topology-based pathway analysis methods

I. Ihnatova, V. Popovici, E. Budinska,

. 2018 ; 13 (1) : e0191154. [pub] 20180125

Language English Country United States

Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

One of the aims of high-throughput gene/protein profiling experiments is the identification of biological processes altered between two or more conditions. Pathway analysis is an umbrella term for a multitude of computational approaches used for this purpose. While in the beginning pathway analysis relied on enrichment-based approaches, a newer generation of methods is now available, exploiting pathway topologies in addition to gene/protein expression levels. However, little effort has been invested in their critical assessment with respect to their performance in different experimental setups. Here, we assessed the performance of seven representative methods identifying differentially expressed pathways between two groups of interest based on gene expression data with prior knowledge of pathway topologies: SPIA, PRS, CePa, TAPPA, TopologyGSA, Clipper and DEGraph. We performed a number of controlled experiments that investigated their sensitivity to sample and pathway size, threshold-based filtering of differentially expressed genes, ability to detect target pathways, ability to exploit the topological information and the sensitivity to different pre-processing strategies. We also verified type I error rates and described the influence of overexpression of single genes, gene sets and topological motifs of various sizes on the detection of a pathway as differentially expressed. The results of our experiments demonstrate a wide variability of the tested methods. We provide a set of recommendations for an informed selection of the proper method for a given data analysis task.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc18010195
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20180404141902.0
007      
ta
008      
180404s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1371/journal.pone.0191154 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)29370226
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Ihnatova, Ivana $u RECETOX, Faculty of Science, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno, Czech Republic. Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno, Czech Republic.
245    12
$a A critical comparison of topology-based pathway analysis methods / $c I. Ihnatova, V. Popovici, E. Budinska,
520    9_
$a One of the aims of high-throughput gene/protein profiling experiments is the identification of biological processes altered between two or more conditions. Pathway analysis is an umbrella term for a multitude of computational approaches used for this purpose. While in the beginning pathway analysis relied on enrichment-based approaches, a newer generation of methods is now available, exploiting pathway topologies in addition to gene/protein expression levels. However, little effort has been invested in their critical assessment with respect to their performance in different experimental setups. Here, we assessed the performance of seven representative methods identifying differentially expressed pathways between two groups of interest based on gene expression data with prior knowledge of pathway topologies: SPIA, PRS, CePa, TAPPA, TopologyGSA, Clipper and DEGraph. We performed a number of controlled experiments that investigated their sensitivity to sample and pathway size, threshold-based filtering of differentially expressed genes, ability to detect target pathways, ability to exploit the topological information and the sensitivity to different pre-processing strategies. We also verified type I error rates and described the influence of overexpression of single genes, gene sets and topological motifs of various sizes on the detection of a pathway as differentially expressed. The results of our experiments demonstrate a wide variability of the tested methods. We provide a set of recommendations for an informed selection of the proper method for a given data analysis task.
650    _2
$a databáze genetické $7 D030541
650    _2
$a datové soubory jako téma $7 D066264
650    _2
$a stanovení celkové genové exprese $x metody $7 D020869
650    _2
$a vysoce účinné nukleotidové sekvenování $7 D059014
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a metabolické sítě a dráhy $7 D053858
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Popovici, Vlad $u RECETOX, Faculty of Science, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Budinska, Eva $u RECETOX, Faculty of Science, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno, Czech Republic. Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00180950 $t PloS one $x 1932-6203 $g Roč. 13, č. 1 (2018), s. e0191154
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29370226 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20180404 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20180404141942 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1287680 $s 1007007
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 13 $c 1 $d e0191154 $e 20180125 $i 1932-6203 $m PLoS One $n PLoS One $x MED00180950
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20180404

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...