ArticleGenome research2025
Recalibrating differential gene expression by genetic dosage variance prioritizes functionally relevant genes.
Article in Genome research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CellTypeAI: cell annotation for scRNA-seq using local generative-AI.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Differential expression (DE) analysis is a widely used method for identifying genes that are functionally relevant for an observed phenotype or biological response. However, typical DE analysis includes selection of genes based on a threshold of fold change in expression under the implicit assumption that all genes are equally sensitive to dosage changes of their transcripts. This tends to favor highly variable genes over more constrained genes where even small changes in expression may be biologically relevant. To address this limitation, we have developed a method to recalibrate each gene's DE fold change based on genetic expression variance observed in the human population. The newly established metric ranks statistically differentially expressed genes, not by nominal change of expression, but by relative change in comparison to natural dosage variation for each gene. We apply our method to RNA sequencing data sets from in vitro stimulus response and neuropsychiatric disease experiments. Compared to the standard approach, our method adjusts the bias in discovery toward highly variable genes and enriches for pathways and biological processes related to metabolic and regulatory activity, indicating a prioritization of functionally relevant driver genes. Tissue-specific recalibration increases detection of known disease-relevant processes. Altogether, our method provides a novel view on DE and contributes toward bridging the existing gap between statistical and biological significance. We believe that this approach will simplify the identification of disease-causing molecular processes and enhance the discovery of therapeutic targets.
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.