Hyunghoon Cho, Bonnie Berger, Jian Peng  Cell Systems 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Original Figures for "Molecular Classification of Cancer: Class Discovery and Class Prediction by Gene Expression Monitoring"
Advertisements

K.U.Leuven Department of Computer Science Predicting gene functions using hierarchical multi-label decision tree ensembles Celine Vens, Leander Schietgat,
Abstract Background: In this work, a candidate gene prioritization method is described, and based on protein-protein interaction network (PPIN) analysis.
Gene expression analysis
Today Ensemble Methods. Recap of the course. Classifier Fusion
Evolutionary Algorithms for Finding Optimal Gene Sets in Micro array Prediction. J. M. Deutsch Presented by: Shruti Sharma.
Metabolic Network Inference from Multiple Types of Genomic Data Yoshihiro Yamanishi Centre de Bio-informatique, Ecole des Mines de Paris.
Dependency networks Sushmita Roy BMI/CS 576 Nov 25 th, 2014.
KAIST TS & IS Lab. CS710 Know your Neighbors: Web Spam Detection using the Web Topology SIGIR 2007, Carlos Castillo et al., Yahoo! 이 승 민.
Identifying “Best Bet” Web Search Results by Mining Past User Behavior Author: Eugene Agichtein, Zijian Zheng (Microsoft Research) Source: KDD2006 Reporter:
Advanced Gene Selection Algorithms Designed for Microarray Datasets Limitation of current feature selection methods: –Ignores gene/gene interaction: single.
David Amar, Tom Hait, and Ron Shamir
Comprehensive Analysis of Tissue-wide Gene Expression and Phenotype Data Reveals Tissues Affected in Rare Genetic Disorders  Ariel Feiglin, Bryce K. Allen,
Hyunghoon Cho, Bonnie Berger, Jian Peng  Cell Systems 
Xiaoshu Chen, Jianzhi Zhang  Cell Systems 
Machine Learning Week 1.
The Functional Impact of Alternative Splicing in Cancer
Volume 60, Issue 5, Pages (December 2008)
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages (March 2018)
Gene expression analysis
A Functional Genomic Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials in Systemic Sclerosis: Toward Precision Medicine and Combination Therapy  Jaclyn N. Taroni, Viktor.
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages e5 (April 2018)
Cell-Line Selectivity Improves the Predictive Power of Pharmacogenomic Analyses and Helps Identify NADPH as Biomarker for Ferroptosis Sensitivity  Kenichi.
Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages (June 2018)
Walking the Interactome for Prioritization of Candidate Disease Genes
Pejman Mohammadi, Niko Beerenwinkel, Yaakov Benenson  Cell Systems 
Translation of Genotype to Phenotype by a Hierarchy of Cell Subsystems
A Computational Algorithm to Predict shRNA Potency
Metabolic Network Prediction of Drug Side Effects
Evolutionary Rewiring of Human Regulatory Networks by Waves of Genome Expansion  Davide Marnetto, Federica Mantica, Ivan Molineris, Elena Grassi, Igor.
Volume 5, Issue 6, Pages e3 (December 2017)
Understanding Tissue-Specific Gene Regulation
Nicolas Erard, Simon R.V. Knott, Gregory J. Hannon  Molecular Cell 
Anastasia Baryshnikova  Cell Systems 
Γ-TEMPy: Simultaneous Fitting of Components in 3D-EM Maps of Their Assembly Using a Genetic Algorithm  Arun Prasad Pandurangan, Daven Vasishtan, Frank.
Yang Liu, Perry Palmedo, Qing Ye, Bonnie Berger, Jian Peng 
The Functional Impact of Alternative Splicing in Cancer
Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages (August 2013)
Target-Specific Precision of CRISPR-Mediated Genome Editing
Volume 43, Issue 3, Pages (September 2015)
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages e2 (March 2018)
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages e4 (October 2017)
The Spatiotemporal Organization of the Striatum Encodes Action Space
Miquel Duran-Frigola, Patrick Aloy  Chemistry & Biology 
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages e2 (March 2018)
Volume 3, Issue 5, Pages e13 (November 2016)
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages e4 (October 2017)
Volume 89, Issue 6, Pages (March 2016)
Gautam Dey, Tobias Meyer  Cell Systems 
Single Sample Expression-Anchored Mechanisms Predict Survival in Head and Neck Cancer Yang et al Presented by Yves A. Lussier MD PhD The University.
Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages e4 (August 2017)
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages e4 (October 2017)
Comprehensive Analysis of Tissue-wide Gene Expression and Phenotype Data Reveals Tissues Affected in Rare Genetic Disorders  Ariel Feiglin, Bryce K. Allen,
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages (March 2018)
Semblance of Heterogeneity in Collective Cell Migration
Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages e3 (January 2019)
Brandon Ho, Anastasia Baryshnikova, Grant W. Brown  Cell Systems 
Γ-TEMPy: Simultaneous Fitting of Components in 3D-EM Maps of Their Assembly Using a Genetic Algorithm  Arun Prasad Pandurangan, Daven Vasishtan, Frank.
Network-Based Coverage of Mutational Profiles Reveals Cancer Genes
Volume 16, Issue 11, Pages (September 2016)
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages e5 (April 2018)
Parallelization and High-Performance Computing Enables Automated Statistical Inference of Multi-scale Models  Nick Jagiella, Dennis Rickert, Fabian J.
Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages (March 2016)
Manisha Panta, Avdesh Mishra, Md Tamjidul Hoque, Joel Atallah
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages e4 (February 2017)
Volume 7, Issue 2, Pages e11 (August 2018)
Comparing 3D Genome Organization in Multiple Species Using Phylo-HMRF
Volume 3, Issue 6, Pages e3 (December 2016)
Global analysis of the chemical–genetic interaction map.
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages e4 (May 2019)
Presentation transcript:

Compact Integration of Multi-Network Topology for Functional Analysis of Genes  Hyunghoon Cho, Bonnie Berger, Jian Peng  Cell Systems  Volume 3, Issue 6, Pages 540-548.e5 (December 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017 Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Overview of Mashup Random walks with restart (RWR) are used to compute the diffusion state for each node in each individual network. Low-dimensional feature vectors describing the topological properties of each node are obtained by jointly minimizing the difference between the observed diffusion states and the parameterized-multinomial logistic distributions across all networks. The low-dimensional representation can be readily plugged into machine learning methods for functional inference. Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Mashup Improves Gene Function Prediction Performance in Human and Yeast We performed 5-fold cross-validation to compare the function prediction performance of Mashup to other state-of-the-art network integration methods, GeneMANIA and STRING’s Bayesian integration followed by a diffusion-based function prediction method DSD (STRING-DSD) in (A) human and (B) yeast. A precision-recall curve for each method is shown (C). Additional figures, including the results on molecular function (MF) and cellular component (CC) ontologies in human and further comparisons to other integration approaches, are provided in Figures S1, S2, and S3. Performance is measured by the fraction of top predictions correctly labeled (Acc), harmonic mean of precision and recall when the top three predictions are assigned to each gene (F1), and the area under the precision recall curve summarized over all labels, both under the micro-averaging (m-PR) and macro-averaging (M-PR) schemes. Results are summarized over ten trials (SD shown as error bars), and asterisks represent where Mashup’s improvement over GeneMANIA is significant (one-sided rank-sum p value <0.01). Overall, Mashup achieves substantially greater predictive performance over previous methods. Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Integrating Multiple Networks Outperforms Individual Networks in Gene Function Prediction We compared Mashup’s 5-fold cross-validation performance, measured by micro-averaged area under the precision-recall curve (AUPR); performance on each individual network in STRING (gray shaded) is compared to using all networks simultaneously (Integrated, red shaded). The results of applying a diffusion-based, single network method, DSD, to each network type is also shown (white shaded). Asterisks represent individual networks where Mashup outperformed DSD (one-sided rank-sum p value <0.01). Results are summarized over ten trials (SD shown as error bars). Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Mashup Improves Network-Based Gene Ontology Reconstruction (A and B) Mashup features extracted from (A) the network data used to generate NeXO or (B) STRING networks were hierarchically clustered to generate an ontology, which is aligned using the same algorithm as NeXO/CliXO to biological process (BP), molecular function (MF), and cellular component (CC) ontologies in the GO database. We compared the alignment quality of Mashup-based ontologies to NeXO and CliXO on the respective datasets. Following previous work (Dutkowski et al., 2013), we measured the alignment quality as the harmonic mean of the fraction of terms in the reconstructed ontology and the fraction of terms in GO that are aligned. The overall score was calculated as the geometric mean of the three scores for different GO types. (C) Breakdown of the number of terms in Mashup-based ontology using STRING networks aligned to GO (at FDR = 10%). Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Mashup Improves Genetic Interaction Prediction and Drug Efficacy Prediction (A) Cross-validation performance of using Mashup representations from STRING networks in SVM classifiers to predict human SL/SDL interactions reported by Jerby-Arnon et al. (2014) as compared to a previous approach that uses various graph-theoretic measures (GTMs) as input features instead (Paladugu et al., 2008) and a more recent approach, Ontotype, that uses the combined, known GO annotations of each gene pair as features in an ensemble of decision trees (Yu et al., 2016). Area under the precision-recall curve (AUPR) is used as the performance metric. Results are summarized over ten trials (SD shown as error bars). (B) Number of single-target drugs in the Cancer Genome Project data (Garnett et al., 2012) whose efficacy is predicted with statistical significance at varying FDR levels based on SDL interactions originally identified by DAISY (Jerby-Arnon et al., 2014) or top 5, 10, and 20 candidate interactions for each drug target predicted by Mashup-based classifers using DAISY interactions as training data. (C) An illustration of a putative SDL interaction between TOP1 and TXNL1 predicted by Mashup and its associated literature evidence. Cell Systems 2016 3, 540-548.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.017) Copyright © 2016 The Authors Terms and Conditions