IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SourceSet: A graphical model approach to identify primary genes in perturbed biological pathways

Author

Listed:
  • Elisa Salviato
  • Vera Djordjilović
  • Monica Chiogna
  • Chiara Romualdi

Abstract

Topological gene-set analysis has emerged as a powerful means for omic data interpretation. Although numerous methods for identifying dysregulated genes have been proposed, few of them aim to distinguish genes that are the real source of perturbation from those that merely respond to the signal dysregulation. Here, we propose a new method, called SourceSet, able to distinguish between the primary and the secondary dysregulation within a Gaussian graphical model context. The proposed method compares gene expression profiles in the control and in the perturbed condition and detects the differences in both the mean and the covariance parameters with a series of likelihood ratio tests. The resulting evidence is used to infer the primary and the secondary set, i.e. the genes responsible for the primary dysregulation, and the genes affected by the perturbation through network propagation. The proposed method demonstrates high specificity and sensitivity in different simulated scenarios and on several real biological case studies. In order to fit into the more traditional pathway analysis framework, SourceSet R package also extends the analysis from a single to multiple pathways and provides several graphical outputs, including Cytoscape visualization to browse the results.Author summary: The rapid increase in omic studies has created a need to understand the biological implications of their results. Gene-set analysis has emerged as a powerful means for gaining such understanding, evolving in the last decade from the classical enrichment analysis to the more powerful topological approaches. Although numerous methods for identifying dysregulated genes have been proposed, few of them aim to distinguish genes that are the real source of perturbation from those that merely respond to the signal dysregulation. This distinction is crucial for network medicine, where the prioritization of the effect of biological perturbations may help in the molecular understanding of drug treatments and diseases. Here we propose a new method, called SourceSet, able to distinguish between primary and secondary dysregulation within a graphical model context, demonstrating a high specificity and sensitivity in different simulated scenarios and on real biological case studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisa Salviato & Vera Djordjilović & Monica Chiogna & Chiara Romualdi, 2019. "SourceSet: A graphical model approach to identify primary genes in perturbed biological pathways," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-28, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007357
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007357
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007357&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007357?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schäfer Juliane & Strimmer Korbinian, 2005. "A Shrinkage Approach to Large-Scale Covariance Matrix Estimation and Implications for Functional Genomics," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-32, November.
    2. Smyth Gordon K, 2004. "Linear Models and Empirical Bayes Methods for Assessing Differential Expression in Microarray Experiments," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-28, February.
    3. Kakajan Komurov & Michael A White & Prahlad T Ram, 2010. "Use of Data-Biased Random Walks on Graphs for the Retrieval of Context-Specific Networks from Genomic Data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-10, August.
    4. Oron Vanunu & Oded Magger & Eytan Ruppin & Tomer Shlomi & Roded Sharan, 2010. "Associating Genes and Protein Complexes with Disease via Network Propagation," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sahra Uygun & Cheng Peng & Melissa D Lehti-Shiu & Robert L Last & Shin-Han Shiu, 2016. "Utility and Limitations of Using Gene Expression Data to Identify Functional Associations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Montazeri Zahra & Yanofsky Corey M. & Bickel David R., 2010. "Shrinkage Estimation of Effect Sizes as an Alternative to Hypothesis Testing Followed by Estimation in High-Dimensional Biology: Applications to Differential Gene Expression," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-33, June.
    3. Xu, Ping & Brock, Guy N. & Parrish, Rudolph S., 2009. "Modified linear discriminant analysis approaches for classification of high-dimensional microarray data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 1674-1687, March.
    4. Hannart, Alexis & Naveau, Philippe, 2014. "Estimating high dimensional covariance matrices: A new look at the Gaussian conjugate framework," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 149-162.
    5. Aaron C Ericsson & J Wade Davis & William Spollen & Nathan Bivens & Scott Givan & Catherine E Hagan & Mark McIntosh & Craig L Franklin, 2015. "Effects of Vendor and Genetic Background on the Composition of the Fecal Microbiota of Inbred Mice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    6. Avagyan, Vahe & Nogales, Francisco J., 2015. "D-trace Precision Matrix Estimation Using Adaptive Lasso Penalties," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS 21775, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.
    7. Ke Hu & Ju Xiang & Yun-Xia Yu & Liang Tang & Qin Xiang & Jian-Ming Li & Yong-Hong Tang & Yong-Jun Chen & Yan Zhang, 2020. "Significance-based multi-scale method for network community detection and its application in disease-gene prediction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    8. T M Murali & Matthew D Dyer & David Badger & Brett M Tyler & Michael G Katze, 2011. "Network-Based Prediction and Analysis of HIV Dependency Factors," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-15, September.
    9. Hossain, Ahmed & Beyene, Joseph & Willan, Andrew R. & Hu, Pingzhao, 2009. "A flexible approximate likelihood ratio test for detecting differential expression in microarray data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(10), pages 3685-3695, August.
    10. Jianqing Fan & Xu Han, 2017. "Estimation of the false discovery proportion with unknown dependence," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(4), pages 1143-1164, September.
    11. Wang Xiaoming & Dinu Irina & Liu Wei & Yasui Yutaka, 2011. "Linear Combination Test for Hierarchical Gene Set Analysis," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, March.
    12. Seunghwan Lee & Sang Cheol Kim & Donghyeon Yu, 2023. "An efficient GPU-parallel coordinate descent algorithm for sparse precision matrix estimation via scaled lasso," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 217-242, March.
    13. Xiaohong Li & Guy N Brock & Eric C Rouchka & Nigel G F Cooper & Dongfeng Wu & Timothy E O’Toole & Ryan S Gill & Abdallah M Eteleeb & Liz O’Brien & Shesh N Rai, 2017. "A comparison of per sample global scaling and per gene normalization methods for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, May.
    14. Kerr Kathleen F., 2012. "Optimality Criteria for the Design of 2-Color Microarray Studies," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, January.
    15. Bala Rajaratnam & Dario Vincenzi, 2016. "A theoretical study of Stein's covariance estimator," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 103(3), pages 653-666.
    16. Ambroise Jérôme & Bearzatto Bertrand & Robert Annie & Macq Benoit & Gala Jean-Luc, 2012. "Combining Multiple Laser Scans of Spotted Microarrays by Means of a Two-Way ANOVA Model," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    17. J. McClatchy & R. Strogantsev & E. Wolfe & H. Y. Lin & M. Mohammadhosseini & B. A. Davis & C. Eden & D. Goldman & W. H. Fleming & P. Conley & G. Wu & L. Cimmino & H. Mohammed & A. Agarwal, 2023. "Clonal hematopoiesis related TET2 loss-of-function impedes IL1β-mediated epigenetic reprogramming in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Alexandra Gyurdieva & Stefan Zajic & Ya-Fang Chang & E. Andres Houseman & Shan Zhong & Jaegil Kim & Michael Nathenson & Thomas Faitg & Mary Woessner & David C. Turner & Aisha N. Hasan & John Glod & Ro, 2022. "Biomarker correlates with response to NY-ESO-1 TCR T cells in patients with synovial sarcoma," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Wang, Christina Dan & Chen, Zhao & Lian, Yimin & Chen, Min, 2022. "Asset selection based on high frequency Sharpe ratio," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 227(1), pages 168-188.
    20. Deborah Chasman & Brandi Gancarz & Linhui Hao & Michael Ferris & Paul Ahlquist & Mark Craven, 2014. "Inferring Host Gene Subnetworks Involved in Viral Replication," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.