Journals / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of Sub-Network search programs in epilepsy-related GWAS dataset

Epilepsi ile ilgili GWAS veri kümesinde alt ağ arama programlarının değerlendirmesi

Pages
292–298
Publication Date
2022-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, running times and features of the programs are comparatively evaluated.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The active sub-network detection aims to find a group of interconnected genes of disease-related genes in a protein-protein interaction network.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Under the same conditions and with the same data set, 9 different programs are run and results of their Greedy algorithm, Genetic algorithm, Simulated Annealing Algorithm, MCC (Maximal Clique Centrality) algorithm, MCODE (Molecular Complex Detection) algorithm, and PEWCC (Protein Complex Detection using Weighted Clustering Coefficient) algorithm are shown.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, running times and features of the programs are comparatively evaluated.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Protein-Protein etkileşim ağları · Aktif alt-ağ araması · Foksiyonel zenginleştirme analizi

Abstract

The active sub-network detection aims to find a group of interconnected genes of disease-related genes in a protein-protein interaction network. In recent years, several algorithms have been developed for this problem. In this study, the analysis of disease-specific sub-network identification programs is evaluated using epilepsy data set. Under the same conditions and with the same data set, 9 different programs are run and results of their Greedy algorithm, Genetic algorithm, Simulated Annealing Algorithm, MCC (Maximal Clique Centrality) algorithm, MCODE (Molecular Complex Detection) algorithm, and PEWCC (Protein Complex Detection using Weighted Clustering Coefficient) algorithm are shown. The top-scoring 5 modules of each program, are compared using fold enrichment analysis and normalized mutual information. Also, the identified subnetworks are functionally enriched using a hypergeometric test, and hence, disease-associated biological pathways are identified. In addition, running times and features of the programs are comparatively evaluated.

Özet

Aktif alt ağ tespiti, bir protein-protein etkileşim ağında hastalıkla ilgili genlerin birbirine bağlı bir grup genini bulmayı amaçlamaktadır. Son yıllarda bu problem için çeşitli algoritmalar geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, hastalığa özgü alt ağ tanımlama programlarının analizleri epilepsi veri seti kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Aynı koşullar altında ve aynı veri seti ile 9 farklı program çalıştırılmış ve bu programların Greedy algoritması, Genetik algoritma, Simüle Tavlama Algoritması, MCC (Maximal Clique Centrality) algoritması, MCODE (Molecular Complex Detection) algoritması ve PEWCC (Protein Complex) Ağırlıklı Kümeleme Katsayısı) algoritması sonuçları gösterilmiştir. Her programın en yüksek puan alan 5 modülü, kat zenginleştirme analizi ve normalleştirilmiş karşılıklı bilgi kullanılarak karşılaştırılmıştır. Aynı zamanda tanımlanan alt ağlar, hipergeometrik test kullanılarak fonksiyonel olarak zenginleştirilmiş ve hastalıkla ilişkili biyolojik yollar belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Ayrıca programların çalışma süreleri ve özellikleri karşılaştırmalı olarak değerlendirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEDETURK, B. A., GUNGOR, B. B. (2022). Evaluation of Sub-Network search programs in epilepsy-related GWAS dataset. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2, 292–298. https://ajindex.com/articles/394863

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Zhang L, Li Y, Ye X, Bian L. “Bioinformatics analysis of microarray profiling identifies that the miR-203-3p target Ppp2ca aggravates seizure activity in mice”. Journal of Molecular Neuroscience, 66(1), 146-154, 2018
  2. Nguyen H, Shrestha S, Tran D, Sha A, Draghici SmNguyen, et al. “A comprehensive survey of tools and software for active subnetwork identification”. Frontiers in Genetics, 10(155), 1-15, 2019
  3. Ozisik O, Bakir-Gungor B, Diri B, Sezerman OU. “A genetic algorithm approach to active subnetwork search applied to GWAS data”. In: 2013 8th International Symposium on Health Informatics and Bioinformatics, Ankara, Turkey, 25-27 September 2013
  4. Bakir-Gungor B, Baykan B, I_seri SU, Tuncer FN, Sezerman OU. “Identifying SNP targeted pathways in partial epilepsies with genome-wide association study data”. Epilepsy Research, 105(1-2), 92-102, 2013
  5. Mitra K, Carvunis AR, Ramesh SK, Ideker T. “Integrative approaches for finding modular structure in biological networks”. Nature Reviews Genetics, 14(10), 719-732, 2013
  6. Nikolayeva I, Pla OG, Schwikowski B. “Network module identification-A widespread theoretical bias and best practices”. Methods, 132, 19-25, 2008
  7. Ideker T, Ozier O, Schwikowski B, Siegel AF. “Discovering regulatory and signaling circuits in molecular interaction Networks”. Bioinformatics, 18(1), 233-240, 2002
  8. Wang L, Matsushita T, Madireddy L, Mousavi P, Baranzini SE. “PINBPA: Cytoscape app for network analysis of GWAS data”. Bioinformatics, 31(2), 262-264, 2014
  9. Su G, Morris JH, Demchak B, Bader GD. “Biological network exploration with Cytoscape 3”. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics, 47(1), 8-13, 2014
  10. Zaki N, Emov D, Berengueres J. “Protein complex detection using interaction reliability assessment and weighted clustering coefficient”. BMC Bioinformatics, 14(163), 1-9, 2013
  11. Ozisik O, Bakir-Gungor B, Diri B, Sezerman UO. “Active subnetwork GA: A two stage genetic algorithm approach31 to active subnetwork search”. Current Bioinformatics, 12(4), 320-328, 2017
  12. Wang J, Zhong J, Chen G, Li M, Wu FX, Pan Y. “clusterviz: a cytoscape APP for cluster analysis of the biological network”. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, 12(4), 815-822, 2014
  13. Chin CH, Chen SH, Wu HH, Ho CW, Ko MT, Lin CY. “cytoHubba: identifying hub objects and sub-networks from complex interactome”. BMC Systems Biology, 8(4), 4-11, 2014
  14. Ayati M, Erten S, Chance MR, Koyutu RK M. “MOBAS: ident