Inferring interaction type in gene regulatory networks using co-expression data

Abstract

BackgroundKnowledge of interaction types in biological networks is important for understanding the functional organization of the cell. Currently information-based approaches are widely used for inferring gene regulatory interactions from genomics data, such as gene expression profiles; however, these approaches do not provide evidence about the regulation type (positive or negative sign) of the interaction.ResultsThis paper describes a novel algorithm, “Signing of Regulatory Networks” (SIREN), which can infer the regulatory type of interactions in a known gene regulatory network (GRN) given corresponding genome-wide gene expression data. To assess our new approach, we applied it to three different benchmark gene regulatory networks, including Escherichia coli, prostate cancer, and an in silico constructed network. Our new method has approximately 68, 70, and 100 percent accuracy, respectively, for these networks. To showcase the utility of SIREN algorithm, we used it to predict previously unknown regulation types for 454 interactions related to the prostate cancer GRN.ConclusionsSIREN is an efficient algorithm with low computational complexity; hence, it is applicable to large biological networks. It can serve as a complementary approach for a wide range of network reconstruction methods that do not provide information about the interaction type.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13015-015-0054-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Deep Convolutional Neural Networks Enable Discrimination of Heterogeneous Digital Pathology Images

“…To evaluate the algorithms performance on all datasets, we also used of two defined measures of accuracy retrieval curve (ARC): true number (TNu) and false number (FNu) [40]. Therefore, to measure the algorithm performances for theses datasets, the accuracy, defined as TNu/(TNu + FNu) which is the fraction of correctly identified images among all images identified by algorithms, while retrieval is the total number of images identified by algorithms.…”

Genome-Scale Transcriptional Regulatory Network Models of Psychiatric and Neurodegenerative Disorders

“…Previous studies have also used gene coexpression to identify disease-perturbed networks in the brain (Gandal et al, 2018;Torkamani et al, 2010;Voineagu et al, 2011;Zhang et al, 2013) and have observed that a subset of differentially expressed networks are enriched for genes that are also associated with genetic risk for the same disease (Voineagu et al, 2011;Zhang et al, 2013). However, specific TFs regulating these gene co-expression networks are generally poorly defined, since methods to reconstruct eukaryotic gene regulatory networks solely from gene co-expression data only rarely predict direct regulatory interactions Brichta et al, 2015;Khosravi et al, 2015;Marbach et al, 2012). Other studies have utilized epigenomic profiling and eQTLs to annotate non-coding genetic variation associated with risk for psychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders Hauberg et al, 2017) and to fine-map transcriptional regulatory mechanisms at specific disease risk loci (Kichaev et al, 2014;Li and Kellis, 2016;Won et al, 2016).…”

MERIT: Systematic Analysis and Characterization of Mutational Effect on RNA Interactome Topology

“…At the P value < 1.0e‐4, we obtained 751,539 correlations among 125 RBPs and 15,429 protein coding genes. We hypothesized that the expression of RBPs were correlated with their target genes if the regulation was active in a specific context . Thus, we integrated genome‐wide gene expression profiles across cancer samples and calculated the expression correlation coefficients between RBPs and potential target genes.…”