02550nas a2200145   4500008004100000245013600041210006900177260000900246300001100255490000600266520201400272100001902286700002002305856007902325       2011                        eng d00aAssessing the biological significance of gene expression signatures and co-expression modules by studying their network properties.0 aAssessing the biological significance of gene expression signatu  c2011  ae174740 v63 a<p>Microarray experiments have been extensively used to define signatures, which are sets of genes that can be considered markers of experimental conditions (typically diseases). Paradoxically, in spite of the apparent functional role that might be attributed to such gene sets, signatures do not seem to be reproducible across experiments. Given the close relationship between function and protein interaction, network properties can be used to study to what extent signatures are composed of genes whose resulting proteins show a considerable level of interaction (and consequently a putative common functional role).We have analysed 618 signatures and 507 modules of co-expression in cancer looking for significant values of four main protein-protein interaction (PPI) network parameters: connection degree, cluster coefficient, betweenness and number of components. A total of 3904 gene ontology (GO) modules, 146 KEGG pathways, and 263 Biocarta pathways have been used as functional modules of reference.Co-expression modules found in microarray experiments display a high level of connectivity, similar to the one shown by conventional modules based on functional definitions (GO, KEGG and Biocarta). A general observation for all the classes studied is that the networks formed by the modules improve their topological parameters when an external protein is allowed to be introduced within the paths (up to the 70% of GO modules show network parameters beyond the random expectation). This fact suggests that functional definitions are incomplete and some genes might still be missing. Conversely, signatures are clearly not capturing the altered functions in the corresponding studies. This is probably because the way in which the genes have been selected in the signatures is too conservative. These results suggest that gene selection methods which take into account relationships among genes should be superior to methods that assume independence among genes outside their functional contexts.</p>1 aMinguez, Pablo1 aDopazo, Joaquin  uhttp://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0017474