197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31039782)
1. Inferring cancer dependencies on metabolic genes from large-scale genetic screens.
Lagziel S; Lee WD; Shlomi T
BMC Biol; 2019 Apr; 17(1):37. PubMed ID: 31039782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Seed-effect modeling improves the consistency of genome-wide loss-of-function screens and identifies synthetic lethal vulnerabilities in cancer cells.
Jaiswal A; Peddinti G; Akimov Y; Wennerberg K; Kuznetsov S; Tang J; Aittokallio T
Genome Med; 2017 Jun; 9(1):51. PubMed ID: 28569207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improved estimation of cancer dependencies from large-scale RNAi screens using model-based normalization and data integration.
McFarland JM; Ho ZV; Kugener G; Dempster JM; Montgomery PG; Bryan JG; Krill-Burger JM; Green TM; Vazquez F; Boehm JS; Golub TR; Hahn WC; Root DE; Tsherniak A
Nat Commun; 2018 Nov; 9(1):4610. PubMed ID: 30389920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Unsupervised correction of gene-independent cell responses to CRISPR-Cas9 targeting.
Iorio F; Behan FM; Gonçalves E; Bhosle SG; Chen E; Shepherd R; Beaver C; Ansari R; Pooley R; Wilkinson P; Harper S; Butler AP; Stronach EA; Saez-Rodriguez J; Yusa K; Garnett MJ
BMC Genomics; 2018 Aug; 19(1):604. PubMed ID: 30103702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Partial gene suppression improves identification of cancer vulnerabilities when CRISPR-Cas9 knockout is pan-lethal.
Krill-Burger JM; Dempster JM; Borah AA; Paolella BR; Root DE; Golub TR; Boehm JS; Hahn WC; McFarland JM; Vazquez F; Tsherniak A
Genome Biol; 2023 Aug; 24(1):192. PubMed ID: 37612728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computational correction of copy number effect improves specificity of CRISPR-Cas9 essentiality screens in cancer cells.
Meyers RM; Bryan JG; McFarland JM; Weir BA; Sizemore AE; Xu H; Dharia NV; Montgomery PG; Cowley GS; Pantel S; Goodale A; Lee Y; Ali LD; Jiang G; Lubonja R; Harrington WF; Strickland M; Wu T; Hawes DC; Zhivich VA; Wyatt MR; Kalani Z; Chang JJ; Okamoto M; Stegmaier K; Golub TR; Boehm JS; Vazquez F; Root DE; Hahn WC; Tsherniak A
Nat Genet; 2017 Dec; 49(12):1779-1784. PubMed ID: 29083409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Network analysis of gene essentiality in functional genomics experiments.
Jiang P; Wang H; Li W; Zang C; Li B; Wong YJ; Meyer C; Liu JS; Aster JC; Liu XS
Genome Biol; 2015 Oct; 16():239. PubMed ID: 26518695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome.
Wang T; Birsoy K; Hughes NW; Krupczak KM; Post Y; Wei JJ; Lander ES; Sabatini DM
Science; 2015 Nov; 350(6264):1096-101. PubMed ID: 26472758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Combined gene essentiality scoring improves the prediction of cancer dependency maps.
Wang W; Malyutina A; Pessia A; Saarela J; Heckman CA; Tang J
EBioMedicine; 2019 Dec; 50():67-80. PubMed ID: 31732481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. OGEE v3: Online GEne Essentiality database with increased coverage of organisms and human cell lines.
Gurumayum S; Jiang P; Hao X; Campos TL; Young ND; Korhonen PK; Gasser RB; Bork P; Zhao XM; He LJ; Chen WH
Nucleic Acids Res; 2021 Jan; 49(D1):D998-D1003. PubMed ID: 33084874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. CRISPR screens in physiologic medium reveal conditionally essential genes in human cells.
Rossiter NJ; Huggler KS; Adelmann CH; Keys HR; Soens RW; Sabatini DM; Cantor JR
Cell Metab; 2021 Jun; 33(6):1248-1263.e9. PubMed ID: 33651980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Improved analysis of CRISPR fitness screens and reduced off-target effects with the BAGEL2 gene essentiality classifier.
Kim E; Hart T
Genome Med; 2021 Jan; 13(1):2. PubMed ID: 33407829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. CEN-tools: an integrative platform to identify the contexts of essential genes.
Sharma S; Dincer C; Weidemüller P; Wright GJ; Petsalaki E
Mol Syst Biol; 2020 Oct; 16(10):e9698. PubMed ID: 33073517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Measuring error rates in genomic perturbation screens: gold standards for human functional genomics.
Hart T; Brown KR; Sircoulomb F; Rottapel R; Moffat J
Mol Syst Biol; 2014 Jul; 10(7):733. PubMed ID: 24987113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. CRISPR/Cas9 Screening to Identify Conditionally Essential Genes in Human Cell Lines.
Huggler KS; Rossiter NJ; Flickinger KM; Cantor JR
Methods Mol Biol; 2022; 2377():29-42. PubMed ID: 34709609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interrogation of Mammalian Protein Complex Structure, Function, and Membership Using Genome-Scale Fitness Screens.
Pan J; Meyers RM; Michel BC; Mashtalir N; Sizemore AE; Wells JN; Cassel SH; Vazquez F; Weir BA; Hahn WC; Marsh JA; Tsherniak A; Kadoch C
Cell Syst; 2018 May; 6(5):555-568.e7. PubMed ID: 29778836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. ACE: a probabilistic model for characterizing gene-level essentiality in CRISPR screens.
Hutton ER; Vakoc CR; Siepel A
Genome Biol; 2021 Sep; 22(1):278. PubMed ID: 34556174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Recovering false negatives in CRISPR fitness screens with JLOE.
Dede M; Hart T
Nucleic Acids Res; 2023 Feb; 51(4):1637-1651. PubMed ID: 36727483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reconciling high-throughput gene essentiality data with metabolic network reconstructions.
Blazier AS; Papin JA
PLoS Comput Biol; 2019 Apr; 15(4):e1006507. PubMed ID: 30973869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comprehensive clinically informed map of dependencies in cancer cells and framework for target prioritization.
Pacini C; Duncan E; Gonçalves E; Gilbert J; Bhosle S; Horswell S; Karakoc E; Lightfoot H; Curry E; Muyas F; Bouaboula M; Pedamallu CS; Cortes-Ciriano I; Behan FM; Zalmas LP; Barthorpe A; Francies H; Rowley S; Pollard J; Beltrao P; Parts L; Iorio F; Garnett MJ
Cancer Cell; 2024 Feb; 42(2):301-316.e9. PubMed ID: 38215750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
