↓ Skip to main content

Peeling Off the Hidden Genetic Heterogeneities of Cancers Based on Disease-Relevant Functional Modules

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Medicine, May 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Peeling Off the Hidden Genetic Heterogeneities of Cancers Based on Disease-Relevant Functional Modules
Published in
Molecular Medicine, May 2006
DOI 10.2119/2005-00036.xu
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jian-zhen Xu, Zheng Guo, Min Zhang, Xia Li, Yong-jin Li, Shao-qi Rao

Abstract

Discovering molecular heterogeneities in phenotypically defined disease is of critical importance both for understanding pathogenic mechanisms of complex diseases and for finding efficient treatments. Recently, it has been recognized that cellular phenotypes are determined by the concerted actions of many functionally related genes in modular fashions. The underlying modular mechanisms should help the understanding of hidden genetic heterogeneities of complex diseases. We defined a putative disease module to be the functional gene groups in terms of both biological process and cellular localization, which are significantly enriched with genes highly variably expressed across the disease samples. As a validation, we used two large cancer datasets to evaluate the ability of the modules for correctly partitioning samples. Then, we sought the subtypes of complex diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) using a public dataset. Finally, the clinical significance of the identified subtypes was verified by survival analysis. In two validation datasets, we achieved highly accurate partitions that best fit the clinical cancer phenotypes. Then, for the notoriously heterogeneous DLBCL, we demonstrated that two partitioned subtypes using an identified module ("cellular response to stress") had very different 5-year overall rates (65% vs. 14%) and were highly significantly (P < 0.007) correlated with the clinical survival rate. Finally, we built a multivariate Cox proportional-hazard prediction model that included 4 genes as risk predictors for survival over DLBCL. The proposed modular approach is a promising computational strategy for peeling off genetic heterogeneities and understanding the modular mechanisms of human diseases such as cancers.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 25%
Computer Science 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2014.
All research outputs
#20,246,428
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Medicine
#997
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,489
of 64,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Medicine
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,135 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 64,611 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.