The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison study: applying segmentation to array CGH data for downstream analyses
Open accessAbstract
Motivation: Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) allows detection and mapping of copy number of DNA segments. A challenge is to make inferences about the copy number structure of the genome. Several statistical methods have been proposed to determine genomic segments with different copy number levels. However, to date, no comprehensive comparison of various characteristics of these methods exists. Moreover, the segmentation results have not been utilized in downstream analyses. Results: We describe a comparison of three popular and publicly available methods for the analysis of array CGH data and we demonstrate how segmentation results may be utilized in the downstream analyses such as testing and classification, yielding higher power and prediction accuracy. Since the methods operate on individual chromosomes, we also propose a novel procedure for merging segments across the genome, which results in an interpretable set of copy number levels, and thus facilitate identification of copy number alterations in each genome. Availability: Contact: jfridlyand@cc.ucsf.edu Supplementary Information:
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Array comparative genomic hybridization and its applications in cancer
Pinkel, D., & Albertson, D. G. (2005) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1569 · Cited by 585
Genome scanning with array CGH delineates regional alterations in mouse islet carcinomas
Hodgson, G., Hager, J. H., Volik, S., Hariono, S., Wernick, M., Moore, D., Albertson, D. G., Pinkel, D., Collins, C., Hanahan, D., et al. (2001) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng771 · Cited by 294
Cited by
Dose translation from animal to human studies revisited.
Reagan‐Shaw, S., Nihal, M., & Ahmad, N. (2008) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.07-9574lsf · Cited by 6,524
Delineating copy number and clonal substructure in human tumors from single-cell transcriptomes
Gao, R., Bai, S., Henderson, Y. C., Lin, Y., Schalck, A., Yan, Y., Kumar, T., Hu, M., Sei, E., Davis, A., et al. (2021) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-020-00795-2 · Cited by 917
Quantitative Image Analysis of Cellular Heterogeneity in Breast Tumors Complements Genomic Profiling
Yuan, Y., Failmezger, H., Rueda, O. M., Ali, H. R., Gräf, S., Chin, S.-F., Schwarz, R. F., Curtis, C., Dunning, M. J., Bardwell, H., et al. (2012) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3004330 · Cited by 426
Optimal recall period and response task for self-reported HIV medication adherence
Lu, M., Safren, S. A., Skolnik, P. R., Rogers, W. H., Coady, W., Hardy, H., & Wilson, I. B. (2008) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-007-9261-4 · Cited by 361
Xue, R., Chen, L., Zhang, C., Fujita, M., Li, R., Yan, S.-M., Ong, C. K., Liao, X., Gao, Q., Sasagawa, S., et al. (2019) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccell.2019.04.007 · Cited by 296
Metadata
- Authors
- Willenbrock, H., & Fridlyand, J.
- Venue
- Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-09-13
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 4084-4091
- ISSN
- 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
- 1367-4811
- OpenAlex
- W2016299037
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 20.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison study: applying segmentation to array CGH data for downstream analyses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti677
- The paper
- Willenbrock, H., & Fridlyand, J. (2005). A comparison study: applying segmentation to array CGH data for downstream analyses. Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti677
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.