ReviewMolecular biomedicine2025
Applications of gene pair methods in clinical research: advancing precision medicine.
Review in Molecular biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-Based Analysis of Gene Expression Data and Gene-Related Information in Pediatric Surgical Oncology: A Scoping Review.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Multidimensional cfRNA response modeling identifies a 5-gene pair signature for high-robust pulmonary tuberculosis diagnosis.iScience · 2026Article
- PTBD: a machine learning-based non-invasive diagnostic model for pulmonary tuberculosis using large-scale blood transcriptomes.BMC biology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-powered prediction of diabetic complications: from clinical data to molecular omics.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Integrin Beta 4 Protein Expression Bimodally Predicts Sensitivity to CDK4/6 Inhibition and Resistance to Immunotherapy in Breast Cancer.The breast journal · 2026Article
- PARP7 Suppresses Radiation-induced Necroptosis and Abscopal Immunity.Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid evolution of high-throughput sequencing technologies has revolutionized biomedical research, producing vast amounts of gene expression data that hold immense potential for biological discovery and clinical applications. Effectively mining these large-scale, high-dimensional data is crucial for facilitating disease detection, subtype differentiation, and understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying disease progression. However, the conventional paradigm of single-gene profiling, measuring absolute expression levels of individual genes, faces critical limitations in clinical implementation. These include vulnerability to batch effects and platform-dependent normalization requirements. In contrast, emerging approaches analyzing relative expression relationships between gene pairs demonstrate unique advantages. By focusing on binary comparisons of two genes' expression magnitudes, these methods inherently normalize experimental variations while capturing biologically stable interaction patterns. In this review, we systematically evaluate gene pair-based analytical frameworks. We classify eleven computational approaches into two fundamental categories: expression value-based methods quantifying differential expression patterns, and rank-based methods exploiting transcriptional ordering relationships. To bridge methodological development with practical implementation, we establish a reproducible analytical pipeline incorporating feature selection, classifier construction, and model evaluation modules using real-world benchmark datasets from pulmonary tuberculosis studies. These findings position gene pair analysis as a transformative paradigm for mining high-dimensional omics data, with direct implications for precision biomarker discovery and mechanistic studies of disease progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.