SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A workflow for the integrative transcriptomic description of molecular pathology and the suggestion of normalizing compounds, exemplified by Parkinson's disease.

Sci Rep · 2018-05-21

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25754-5PMID: 29784986

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The volume of molecular observations on human diseases in public databases is continuously increasing at accelerating rates. A bottleneck is their computational integration into a coherent description, from which researchers may derive new well-founded hypotheses. Also, the need to integrate data from different technologies (genetics, coding and regulatory RNA, proteomics) emerged in order to identify biomarkers for early diagnosis and prognosis of complex diseases and therefore facilitating the development of novel treatment approaches. We propose here a workflow for the integrative transcriptomic description of the molecular pathology in Parkinsons's Disease (PD), including suggestions of compounds normalizing disease-induced transcriptional changes as a paradigmatic example. We integrated gene expression profiles, miRNA signatures, and publicly available regulatory databases to specify a partial model of the molecular pathophysiology of PD. Six genetic driver elements (2 genes and 4 miRNAs) and several functional network modules that are associated with PD were identified. Functional modules were assessed for their statistical significance, cellular functional homogeneity, literature evidence, and normalizing small molecules. In summary, our workflow for the joint regulatory analysis of coding and non-coding RNA, has the potential to yield clinically as well as biologically relevant information, as demonstrated here on PD data.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.