Page 101 - Read Online

Papadodima et al. J Transl Genet Genom 2019;3:7. I https://doi.org/10.20517/jtgg.2018.33 Page 11 of 12

83. Shihab HA, Gough J, Cooper DN, Stenson PD, Barker GL, et al. Predicting the functional, molecular, and phenotypic consequences of
amino acid substitutions using hidden Markov models. Human mutation 2013;34:57-65.
84. Davydov EV, Goode DL, Sirota M, Cooper GM, Sidow A, et al. Identifying a high fraction of the human genome to be under selective
constraint using GERP++. PLoS Comput Biol 2010;6:e1001025.
85. Kaminker JS, Zhang Y, Waugh A, Haverty PM, Peters B, et al. Distinguishing cancer-associated missense mutations from common
polymorphisms. Cancer Res 2007;67:465-73.
86. Reva B, Antipin Y, Sander C. Predicting the functional impact of protein mutations: application to cancer genomics. Nucleic Acids Res
2011;39:e118.
87. Reva B, Antipin Y, Sander C. Determinants of protein function revealed by combinatorial entropy optimization. Genome Biol 2007;8:R232.
88. Schwarz JM, Cooper DN, Schuelke M, Seelow D. MutationTaster2: mutation prediction for the deep-sequencing age. Nat Methods
2014;11:361-2.
89. Gonzalez-Perez A, Lopez-Bigas N. Functional impact bias reveals cancer drivers. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:e169.
90. Ferrer-Costa C, Gelpí JL, Zamakola L, Parraga I, de la Cruz X, et al. PMUT: a web-based tool for the annotation of pathological mutations
on proteins. Bioinformatics 2005;21:3176-8.
91. Adzhubei IA, Schmidt S, Peshkin L, Ramensky VE, Gerasimova A, et al. A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations.
United States: Nat Methods; 2010. pp. 248-9.
92. Choi Y, Sims GE, Murphy S, Miller JR, Chan AP. Predicting the functional effect of amino acid substitutions and indels. PLoS One
2012;7:e46688.
93. Ng PC, Henikoff S. Predicting deleterious amino acid substitutions. Genome Res 2001;11:863-74.
94. Yue P, Melamud E, Moult J. SNPs3D: candidate gene and SNP selection for association studies. BMC Bioinformatics 2006;7:166.
95. Gonzalez-Perez A, Deu-Pons J, Lopez-Bigas N. Improving the prediction of the functional impact of cancer mutations by baseline tolerance
transformation. Genome Med 2012;4:89.
96. Hua X, Xu H, Yang Y, Zhu J, Liu P, et al. DrGaP: a powerful tool for identifying driver genes and pathways in cancer sequencing studies.
Am J Hum Genet 2013;93:439-51.
97. Dees ND, Zhang Q, Kandoth C, Wendl MC, Schierding W, et al. MuSiC: identifying mutational significance in cancer genomes. Genome
Res 2012;22:1589-98.
98. Youn A, Simon R. Identifying cancer driver genes in tumor genome sequencing studies. Bioinformatics 2011;27:175-81.
99. Carter H, Chen S, Isik L, Tyekucheva S, Velculescu VE, et al. Cancer-specific high-throughput annotation of somatic mutations:
computational prediction of driver missense mutations. Cancer Res 2009;69:6660-7.
100. Wong WC, Kim D, Carter H, Diekhans M, Ryan MC, et al. CHASM and SNVBox: toolkit for detecting biologically important single
nucleotide mutations in cancer. Bioinformatics 2011;27:2147-8.
101. Tan H, Bao J, Zhou X. A novel missense-mutation-related feature extraction scheme for “driver” mutation identification. Bioinformatics.
2012;28:2948-55.
102. van Dyk E, Reinders MJT, Wessels LFA. A scale-space method for detecting recurrent DNA copy number changes with analytical false
discovery rate control. Nucleic Acids Res 2013;41:e100.
103. Zhang Q, Ding L, Larson DE, Koboldt DC, McLellan MD, et al. CMDS: a population-based method for identifying recurrent DNA copy
number aberrations in cancer from high-resolution data. Bioinformatics 2010;26:464-9.
104. Mermel CH, Schumacher SE, Hill B, Meyerson ML, Beroukhim R, et al. GISTIC2.0 facilitates sensitive and confident localization of the
targets of focal somatic copy-number alteration in human cancers. Genome Biol 2011;12:R41.
105. Sanchez-Garcia F, Akavia UD, Mozes E, Pe’er D. JISTIC: Identification of significant targets in cancer. BMC Bioinformatics 2010;11:189.
106. Ryslik GA, Cheng Y, Cheung KH, Modis Y, Zhao H. Utilizing protein structure to identify non-random somatic mutations. BMC
Bioinformatics 2013;14:190.
107. Ye J, Pavlicek A, Lunney EA, Rejto PA, Teng CH. Statistical method on nonrandom clustering with application to somatic mutations in
cancer. BMC Bioinformatics 2010;11:11.
108. Koutsandreas T, Binenbaum I, Pilalis E, Valavanis I, Papadodima O, et al. Analyzing and visualizing genomic complexity for the derivation
of the emergent molecular networks. IJMSTR 2016;4:30-49.
109. Vandin F, Upfal E, Raphael BJ. Algorithms for detecting significantly mutated pathways in cancer. J Comput Biol 2011;18:507-22.
110. Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for
interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:15545-50.
111. Ciriello G, Cerami E, Sander C, Schultz N. Mutual exclusivity analysis identifies oncogenic network modules. Genome Res 2012;22:398-
406.
112. Leiserson MDM, Blokh D, Sharan R, Raphael BJ. Simultaneous identification of multiple driver pathways in cancer. PLoS Comput Biol
2013;9:e1003054.
113. Cerami E, Demir E, Schultz N, Taylor BS, Sander C. Automated network analysis identifies core pathways in glioblastoma. PLoS One
2010;5:e8918.
114. Wendl MC, Wallis JW, Lin L, Kandoth C, Mardis ER, et al. PathScan: a tool for discerning mutational significance in groups of putative
cancer genes. Bioinformatics 2011;27:1595-602.
115. Boca SM, Kinzler KW, Velculescu VE, Vogelstein B, Parmigiani G. Patient-oriented gene set analysis for cancer mutation data. Genome
Biol 2010;11:R112.
116. Miller CA, Settle SH, Sulman EP, Aldape KD, Milosavljevic A. Discovering functional modules by identifying recurrent and mutually