BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20838582)

  • 1. High resolution models of transcription factor-DNA affinities improve in vitro and in vivo binding predictions.
    Agius P; Arvey A; Chang W; Noble WS; Leslie C
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2010 Sep; 6(9):. PubMed ID: 20838582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantitative modeling of transcription factor binding specificities using DNA shape.
    Zhou T; Shen N; Yang L; Abe N; Horton J; Mann RS; Bussemaker HJ; Gordân R; Rohs R
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Apr; 112(15):4654-9. PubMed ID: 25775564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Stability selection for regression-based models of transcription factor-DNA binding specificity.
    Mordelet F; Horton J; Hartemink AJ; Engelhardt BE; Gordân R
    Bioinformatics; 2013 Jul; 29(13):i117-25. PubMed ID: 23812975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The next generation of transcription factor binding site prediction.
    Mathelier A; Wasserman WW
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2013; 9(9):e1003214. PubMed ID: 24039567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Distinguishing direct versus indirect transcription factor-DNA interactions.
    Gordân R; Hartemink AJ; Bulyk ML
    Genome Res; 2009 Nov; 19(11):2090-100. PubMed ID: 19652015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Nonconsensus Protein Binding to Repetitive DNA Sequence Elements Significantly Affects Eukaryotic Genomes.
    Afek A; Cohen H; Barber-Zucker S; Gordân R; Lukatsky DB
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2015 Aug; 11(8):e1004429. PubMed ID: 26285121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A biophysical model for analysis of transcription factor interaction and binding site arrangement from genome-wide binding data.
    He X; Chen CC; Hong F; Fang F; Sinha S; Ng HH; Zhong S
    PLoS One; 2009 Dec; 4(12):e8155. PubMed ID: 19956545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Transcription factor-binding k-mer analysis clarifies the cell type dependency of binding specificities and cis-regulatory SNPs in humans.
    Tahara S; Tsuchiya T; Matsumoto H; Ozaki H
    BMC Genomics; 2023 Oct; 24(1):597. PubMed ID: 37805453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Blurring of high-resolution data shows that the effect of intrinsic nucleosome occupancy on transcription factor binding is mostly regional, not local.
    Goh WS; Orlov Y; Li J; Clarke ND
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2010 Jan; 6(1):e1000649. PubMed ID: 20098497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparative analysis of transcription factor binding models learned from PBM, HT-SELEX and ChIP data.
    Orenstein Y; Shamir R
    Nucleic Acids Res; 2014 Apr; 42(8):e63. PubMed ID: 24500199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A feature-based approach to modeling protein-DNA interactions.
    Sharon E; Lubliner S; Segal E
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2008 Aug; 4(8):e1000154. PubMed ID: 18725950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A map of direct TF-DNA interactions in the human genome.
    Gheorghe M; Sandve GK; Khan A; Chèneby J; Ballester B; Mathelier A
    Nucleic Acids Res; 2019 Feb; 47(4):e21. PubMed ID: 30517703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Integrating genomic data to predict transcription factor binding.
    Holloway DT; Kon M; DeLisi C
    Genome Inform; 2005; 16(1):83-94. PubMed ID: 16362910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Non-targeted transcription factors motifs are a systemic component of ChIP-seq datasets.
    Worsley Hunt R; Wasserman WW
    Genome Biol; 2014 Jul; 15(7):412. PubMed ID: 25070602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. BEESEM: estimation of binding energy models using HT-SELEX data.
    Ruan S; Swamidass SJ; Stormo GD
    Bioinformatics; 2017 Aug; 33(15):2288-2295. PubMed ID: 28379348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Computational identification of diverse mechanisms underlying transcription factor-DNA occupancy.
    Cheng Q; Kazemian M; Pham H; Blatti C; Celniker SE; Wolfe SA; Brodsky MH; Sinha S
    PLoS Genet; 2013; 9(8):e1003571. PubMed ID: 23935523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. ChIPulate: A comprehensive ChIP-seq simulation pipeline.
    Datta V; Hannenhalli S; Siddharthan R
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2019 Mar; 15(3):e1006921. PubMed ID: 30897079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Sequence and chromatin determinants of cell-type-specific transcription factor binding.
    Arvey A; Agius P; Noble WS; Leslie C
    Genome Res; 2012 Sep; 22(9):1723-34. PubMed ID: 22955984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessing the model transferability for prediction of transcription factor binding sites based on chromatin accessibility.
    Liu S; Zibetti C; Wan J; Wang G; Blackshaw S; Qian J
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2017 Jul; 18(1):355. PubMed ID: 28750606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. High-resolution DNA-binding specificity analysis of yeast transcription factors.
    Zhu C; Byers KJ; McCord RP; Shi Z; Berger MF; Newburger DE; Saulrieta K; Smith Z; Shah MV; Radhakrishnan M; Philippakis AA; Hu Y; De Masi F; Pacek M; Rolfs A; Murthy T; Labaer J; Bulyk ML
    Genome Res; 2009 Apr; 19(4):556-66. PubMed ID: 19158363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.