Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 194

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of the Psoriasis Transcriptome across Different Studies by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA)

Open access
Suárez-Fariñas, Mayte, Lowes, Michelle A., Zaba, Lisa C., Krueger, James G.·2010·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to develop a consistent molecular definition of psoriasis. There have been several published microarray studies of psoriasis, and we compared disease-related genes identified across these different studies of psoriasis with our own in order to establish a consensus. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We present a psoriasis transcriptome from a group of 15 patients enrolled in a clinical study, and assessed its biological validity using a set of important pathways known to be involved in psoriasis. We also identified a key set of cytokines that are now strongly implicated in driving disease-related pathology, but which are not detected well on gene array platforms and require more sensitive methods to measure mRNA levels in skin tissues. Comparison of our transcriptome with three other published lists of psoriasis genes showed apparent inconsistencies based on the number of overlapping genes. We extended the well-established approach of Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) to compare a new study with these other published list of differentially expressed genes (DEG) in a more comprehensive manner. We applied our method to these three published psoriasis transcriptomes and found them to be in good agreement with our study. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Due to wide variability in clinical protocols, platform and sample handling, and subtle disease-related signals, intersection of published DEG lists was unable to establish consensus between studies. In order to leverage the power of multiple transcriptomes reported by several laboratories using different patients and protocols, more sophisticated methods like the extension of GSEA presented here, should be used in order to overcome the shortcomings of overlapping individual DEG approach.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0010247

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 194

Metadata

Authors
Suárez-Fariñas, M., Lowes, M. A., Zaba, L. C., & Krueger, J. G.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2010-04-20
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
e10247
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018107887
Cited by
194
References
4
FWCI
4.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Evaluation of the Psoriasis Transcriptome across Different Studies by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0010247
The paper
Suárez-Fariñas, M., Lowes, M. A., Zaba, L. C., & Krueger, J. G. (2010). Evaluation of the Psoriasis Transcriptome across Different Studies by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA). PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010247

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.