↓ Skip to main content

Single Sample Expression-Anchored Mechanisms Predict Survival in Head and Neck Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Single Sample Expression-Anchored Mechanisms Predict Survival in Head and Neck Cancer
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, January 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002350
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xinan Yang, Kelly Regan, Yong Huang, Qingbei Zhang, Jianrong Li, Tanguy Y. Seiwert, Ezra E. W. Cohen, H. Rosie Xing, Yves A. Lussier

Abstract

Gene expression signatures that are predictive of therapeutic response or prognosis are increasingly useful in clinical care; however, mechanistic (and intuitive) interpretation of expression arrays remains an unmet challenge. Additionally, there is surprisingly little gene overlap among distinct clinically validated expression signatures. These "causality challenges" hinder the adoption of signatures as compared to functionally well-characterized single gene biomarkers. To increase the utility of multi-gene signatures in survival studies, we developed a novel approach to generate "personal mechanism signatures" of molecular pathways and functions from gene expression arrays. FAIME, the Functional Analysis of Individual Microarray Expression, computes mechanism scores using rank-weighted gene expression of an individual sample. By comparing head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) samples with non-tumor control tissues, the precision and recall of deregulated FAIME-derived mechanisms of pathways and molecular functions are comparable to those produced by conventional cohort-wide methods (e.g. GSEA). The overlap of "Oncogenic FAIME Features of HNSCC" (statistically significant and differentially regulated FAIME-derived genesets representing GO functions or KEGG pathways derived from HNSCC tissue) among three distinct HNSCC datasets (pathways:46%, p<0.001) is more significant than the gene overlap (genes:4%). These Oncogenic FAIME Features of HNSCC can accurately discriminate tumors from control tissues in two additional HNSCC datasets (n = 35 and 91, F-accuracy = 100% and 97%, empirical p<0.001, area under the receiver operating characteristic curves = 99% and 92%), and stratify recurrence-free survival in patients from two independent studies (p = 0.0018 and p = 0.032, log-rank). Previous approaches depending on group assignment of individual samples before selecting features or learning a classifier are limited by design to discrete-class prediction. In contrast, FAIME calculates mechanism profiles for individual patients without requiring group assignment in validation sets. FAIME is more amenable for clinical deployment since it translates the gene-level measurements of each given sample into pathways and molecular function profiles that can be applied to analyze continuous phenotypes in clinical outcome studies (e.g. survival time, tumor volume).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
Netherlands 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 83 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 26%
Researcher 18 20%
Other 9 10%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 13%
Computer Science 10 11%
Mathematics 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 14 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,600,874
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,133
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,412
of 252,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#63
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 252,180 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.