Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42794689›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2026

Sample-Specific Generalized Cross-Validation for Gene Network Analysis of Cytarabine Response in Cancer Cell Lines.

Jooee Oh, Heewon Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jooee OhDepartment of Statistics, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul 02844, Republic of Korea.
Heewon ParkSchool of Mathematics Statistics and Data Science, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul 01133, Republic of Korea.

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea RS-2026-25472402
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sample-specific gene regulatory network analysis can reveal molecular heterogeneity associated with individual characteristics, such as anticancer drug sensitivity. The varying coefficient model with kernel-based L1 regularization enables the estimation of such networks, but its performance depends strongly on hyperparameter selection. Conventional cross-validation is computationally intensive and provides only an averaged evaluation across samples, limiting its suitability for sample-specific analysis. To address these limitations, we propose doubleS-GCV, a sample-specific generalized cross-validation criterion for selecting hyperparameters in sample-specific gene network estimation. DoubleS-GCV provides a separate model evaluation for each sample while substantially reducing computational burden. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated that doubleS-GCV achieved accurate gene selection and network estimation and outperformed conventional information criteria, including AIC, BIC, AICC, and HQC. Application to GDSC cancer cell lines identified Cytarabine sensitivity-specific gene networks and candidate biomarkers supported by previous studies. The estimated networks also exhibited nonlinear structural changes across Cytarabine sensitivity levels, indicating that molecular interactions vary with drug response. These results demonstrate that doubleS-GCV provides an efficient and reliable model selection framework for sample-specific gene network analysis.

Indexed as

Antimetabolites, AntineoplasticCytarabineGene Regulatory NetworksNeoplasmsAlgorithmsCell Line, TumorDrug Resistance, NeoplasmGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansMonte Carlo MethodAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticCytarabinegene networkgeneralized cross validationmodel evaluationsample specific analysis

Identifiers

PMID42794689
PMCPMC13607853

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.