| Literature DB >> 27797778 |
Frederik Gwinner1,2, Gwénola Boulday1,2, Claire Vandiedonck3,4, Minh Arnould1,2, Cécile Cardoso1,2, Iryna Nikolayeva5,6,7, Oriol Guitart-Pla5, Cécile V Denis8, Olivier D Christophe8, Johann Beghain6,9, Elisabeth Tournier-Lasserve1,2,10, Benno Schwikowski5.
Abstract
Motivation: Most computational approaches for the analysis of omics data in the context of interaction networks have very long running times, provide single or partial, often heuristic, solutions and/or contain user-tuneable parameters.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 27797778 PMCID: PMC5408824 DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btw676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioinformatics ISSN: 1367-4803 Impact factor: 6.937
Fig. 1Subnetwork and local subnetwork pathway models. Local subnetworks are specific subnetworks that consist of a center gene and its direct network neighbors
Fig. 2Summary of LEAN. Inputs are (A) an interaction network and (B) an input P-value for each gene in the network, as, e.g. obtained by analysis of differential expression. For any gene g, the genes in its direct neighborhood along with their individual input P-values are then extracted from the network (C). The P-values within the neighborhood of g are sorted in increasing order and the unnormalized enrichment score ES is calculated according to Equation 2 (D). To normalize by local subnetwork size, random samples of equal size to are drawn from all input P-values and a value is computed for each of them (E). The distribution of values is then used to estimate the enrichment P-value , according to Equation 3 (F). Used abbreviations: FC = Fold Change (log2) between two conditions
Fig. 3ROC analysis results: Panel A shows average true positive rates (TPR) over 10 separate pathway simulation instances at, given false-positive rates (FPR). Error bars denote standard error of the mean. Average TPR and FPR obtained by 1, 5 and 10 highest-scoring KPM, jActiveModules and GiGA subnetworks, respectively, are shown. All pathway simulations used in the creation of this figure were run with and . Panel B shows areas under the curve (AUCs) after randomly rewiring up to 30% of the network edges
Fig. 4Overlap of significant gene/local subnetwork center lists detected on publicly available datasets: (A) Limma gene-by-gene analysis, (B) LEAN. Numbers inside cells reflect absolute overlap, color corresponds to Jaccard index (JI). Information about the perturbed pathway and used platform technology are shown as color strips on the top and right of the heat map, respectively. Hierarchical complete linkage clustering of the datasets based on Euclidean distance of Jaccard index profiles is represented as a dendrogram
Fig. 5Local subnetwork centered on VWF: The first genes contributing most to the significance of the VWF local subnetwork in the three CCM invalidation mouse models are shown as gene networks. Genes are represented as nodes with node border color indicating differential expression. Edges represent functional similarity between pairs of genes with a STRING interaction confidence score . Interactions with VWF have been omitted for better visibility. Annotation of proteins with the three GO biological process terms ‘angiogenesis’, ‘blood coagulation’ and ‘hemopoiesis’ are represented by correspondingly labeled colored frames
Fig. 6VWF-specific fluorescent staining of mouse tissues shows a dysfunction of the VWF pathway in vivo in the CCM mouse model: The first row shows cerebral sections, the second row whole mount retinas; The first column shows control tissues, the second column tissues from CCM2-ablated animals. Vessels are shown in red (PECAM/isoB4-staining), VWF in green and nuclei in blue. Scale bars: 10 µm (A,B), 50 µm (C,D)