Dataset Information

Empirical comparison of structure-based pathway methods.

ABSTRACT: Multiple methods have been proposed to estimate pathway activities from expression profiles, and yet, there is not enough information available about the performance of those methods. This makes selection of a suitable tool for pathway analysis difficult. Although methods based on simple gene lists have remained the most common approach, various methods that also consider pathway structure have emerged. To provide practical insight about the performance of both list-based and structure-based methods, we tested six different approaches to estimate pathway activities in two different case study settings of different characteristics. The first case study setting involved six renal cell cancer data sets, and the differences between expression profiles of case and control samples were relatively big. The second case study setting involved four type 1 diabetes data sets, and the profiles of case and control samples were more similar to each other. In general, there were marked differences in the outcomes of the different pathway tools even with the same input data. In the cancer studies, the results of a tested method were typically consistent across the different data sets, yet different between the methods. In the more challenging diabetes studies, almost all the tested methods detected as significant only few pathways if any.

SUBMITTER: Jaakkola MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4793894 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Empirical comparison of structure-based pathway methods.

Jaakkola Maria K MK Elo Laura L LL

Briefings in bioinformatics 20150721 2

Multiple methods have been proposed to estimate pathway activities from expression profiles, and yet, there is not enough information available about the performance of those methods. This makes selection of a suitable tool for pathway analysis difficult. Although methods based on simple gene lists have remained the most common approach, various methods that also consider pathway structure have emerged. To provide practical insight about the performance of both list-based and structure-based met ...[more]

PMID: 26197809

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundComputational strain optimisation methods (CSOMs) have been successfully used to exploit genome-scale metabolic models, yielding strategies useful for allowing compound overproduction in metabolic cell factories. Minimal cut sets are particularly interesting since their definition allows searching for intervention strategies that impose strong growth-coupling phenotypes, and are not subject to optimality bias when compared with simulation-based CSOMs. However, since both types of methods have different underlying principles, they also imply different ways to formulate metabolic engineering problems, posing an obstacle when comparing their outputs.ResultsIn this work, we perform an in-depth analysis of potential strategies that can be obtained with both methods, providing a critical comparison of performance, robustness, predicted phenotypes as well as strategy structure and size. To this end, we devised a pipeline including enumeration of strategies from evolutionary algorithms (EA) and minimal cut sets (MCS), filtering and flux analysis of predicted mutants to optimize the production of succinic acid in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We additionally attempt to generalize problem formulations for MCS enumeration within the context of growth-coupled product synthesis. Strategies from evolutionary algorithms show the best compromise between acceptable growth rates and compound overproduction. However, constrained MCSs lead to a larger variety of phenotypes with several degrees of growth-coupling with production flux. The latter have proven useful in revealing the importance, in silico, of the gamma-aminobutyric acid shunt and manipulation of cofactor pools in growth-coupled designs for succinate production, mechanisms which have also been touted as potentially useful for metabolic engineering.ConclusionsThe two main groups of CSOMs are valuable for finding growth-coupled mutants. Despite the limitations in maximum growth rates and large strategy sizes, MCSs help uncover novel mechanisms for compound overproduction and thus, analyzing outputs from both methods provides a richer overview on strategies that can be potentially carried over in vivo.

Project description:The prediction of binding energies from the three-dimensional (3D) structure of a protein-ligand complex is an important goal of biophysics and structural biology. Here, we critically assess the use of empirical, solvent-accessible surface area-based calculations for the prediction of the binding of Src-SH2 domain with a series of tyrosyl phosphopeptides based on the high-affinity ligand from the hamster middle T antigen (hmT), where the residue in the pY+ 3 position has been changed. Two other peptides based on the C-terminal regulatory site of the Src protein and the platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) are also investigated. Here, we take into account the effects of proton linkage on binding, and test five different surface area-based models that include different treatments for the contributions to conformational change and protein solvation. These differences relate to the treatment of conformational flexibility in the peptide ligand and the inclusion of proximal ordered solvent molecules in the surface area calculations. This allowed the calculation of a range of thermodynamic state functions (deltaCp, deltaS, deltaH, and deltaG) directly from structure. Comparison with the experimentally derived data shows little agreement for the interaction of SrcSH2 domain and the range of tyrosyl phosphopeptides. Furthermore, the adoption of the different models to treat conformational change and solvation has a dramatic effect on the calculated thermodynamic functions, making the predicted binding energies highly model dependent. While empirical, solvent-accessible surface area based calculations are becoming widely adopted to interpret thermodynamic data, this study highlights potential problems with application and interpretation of this type of approach. There is undoubtedly some agreement between predicted and experimentally determined thermodynamic parameters: however, the tolerance of this approach is not sufficient to make it ubiquitously applicable.

Dataset Information

Empirical comparison of structure-based pathway methods.

Publications

Empirical comparison of structure-based pathway methods.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure