Collaborative network analysis for the interpretation of transcriptomics data in rare diseases, an application to Huntington's disease
Ozisik, O.; Kara, N. S.; Abbassi-Daloii, T.; Terezol, M.; Queralt-Rosinach, N.; Jacobsen, A.; Sezerman, O. U.; Roos, M.; Evelo, C. T.; Baudot, A.; Ehrhart, F.; Mina, E.
Show abstract
BackgroundRare diseases may affect the quality of life of patients and in some cases be life-threatening. Therapeutic opportunities are often limited, in part because of the lack of understanding of the molecular mechanisms that can cause disease. This can be ascribed to the low prevalence of rare diseases and therefore the lower sample sizes available for research. A way to overcome this is to integrate experimental rare disease data with prior knowledge using network-based methods. Taking this one step further, we hypothesized that combining and analyzing the results from multiple network-based methods could provide data-driven hypotheses of pathogenicity mechanisms from multiple perspectives. ResultsWe analyzed a Huntingtons disease (HD) transcriptomics dataset using six network-based methods in a collaborative way. These methods either inherently reported enriched annotation terms or their results were fed into enrichment analyses. The resulting significantly enriched Reactome pathways were then summarized using the ontological hierarchy which allowed the integration and interpretation of outputs from multiple methods. Among the resulting enriched pathways, there are pathways that have been shown previously to be involved in HD and pathways whose direct contribution to disease pathogenesis remains unclear and requires further investigation. ConclusionsIn summary, our study shows that collaborative network analysis approaches are well-suited to study rare diseases, as they provide hypotheses for pathogenic mechanisms from multiple perspectives. Applying different methods to the same case study can uncover different disease mechanisms that would not be apparent with the application of a single method.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- CoRegNet: Unraveling Gene Co-regulation Networks from Public RNA-Seq Repositories Using a Beta-Binomial Statistical Model 95%
- Integrative COVID-19 Biological Network Inference with Probabilistic Core Decomposition 94%
- LRcell: detecting the source of differential expression at the sub-cell type level from bulk RNA-seq data 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Crinet: A computational tool to infer genome-wide competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) interactions 94%
- Towards development of a statistical framework to evaluate myotonic dystrophy type 1 mRNA biomarkers in the context of a clinical trial 94%
- Identification of functionally connected multi-omic biomarkers for Alzheimer’s Disease using modularity-constrained Lasso 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- GeneCOCOA: Detecting context-specific functions of individual genes using co-expression data 97%
- HELP: A computational framework for labelling and predicting human common and context-specific essential genes 96%
- Detection of genes with differential expression dispersion unravels the role of autophagy in cancer progression 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Finding disease modules for cancer and COVID-19 in gene co-expression networks with the Core&Peel method 97%
- System-level analysis of genes mutated in muscular dystrophies reveals a functional pattern associated with muscle weakness distribution 95%
- Naturally occurring combinations of receptors from single cell transcriptomics in endothelial cells 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.