Identification of differentially expressed gene modules in heterogeneous diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Identification of differentially expressed genes is necessary for unraveling disease pathogenesis. This task is complicated by the fact that many diseases are heterogeneous at the molecular level and samples representing distinct disease subtypes may demonstrate different patterns of dysregulation. Biclustering methods are capable of identifying genes that follow a similar expression pattern only in a subset of samples and hence can consider disease heterogeneity. However, identifying biologically significant and reproducible sets of genes and samples remain challenging for the existing tools. Many recent studies have shown that the integration of gene expression and protein interaction data improves the robustness of prediction and classification and advances biomarker discovery. RESULTS: Here, we present DESMOND, a new method for identification of Differentially ExpreSsed gene MOdules iN Diseases. DESMOND performs network-constrained biclustering on gene expression data and identifies gene modules-connected sets of genes up- or down-regulated in subsets of samples. We applied DESMOND on expression profiles of samples from two large breast cancer cohorts and have shown that the capability of DESMOND to incorporate protein interactions allows identifying the biologically meaningful gene and sample subsets and improves the reproducibility of the results. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/ozolotareva/DESMOND. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".