Bridging the Gap Between Pathways and Experimental Data Alexander Lex.

Bridging the Gap Between Pathways and Experimental Data

Alexander Lex

2

Experimental Data and Pathways

Pathways represent consensus knowledge for a healthy organism or specific disease

Cannot account for variation found in real-world data

Branches can be (in)activated due to mutation,

changed gene expression,

modulation due to drug treatment,

etc.Alexander Lex | Harvard University

3

Why use Visualization?

Efficient communication of information

A -3.4

B 2.8

C 3.1

D -3

E 0.5

F 0.3Alexander Lex | Harvard University

C

B

D

F

A

E

4

Experimental Data and Pathways

[Lindroos2002]

[KEGG]

Alexander Lex | Harvard University

5

Visualization Approaches

On-Node Mapping Separate Linked Views Small Multiples

Layout Adaption Linearization

[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]

[Lin

droo

s 20

02]


Path-Extraction

Alexander Lex | Harvard University 6

REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS

Teaser Picture

7

What to Consider when Visualizing Experimental Data and Pathways

Conflicting GoalsPreserving topology of pathways

Showing lots of experimental data

Five RequirementsIdeal visualization technique addresses all


8

R I: Data Scale

Large number of experimentsLarge datasets have more than 500 experiments

Multiple groups/conditions


9

R II: Data Heterogeneity

Different types of data, e.g.,mRNA expression numerical

mutation statuscategorical

copy number variation ordered categorical

metabolite concentration numerical

Require different visualization techniques


10

R III: Multi-Mapping

Pathways nodes are biomoleculesProteins, nucleic acids, lipids, metabolites

Experimental data often on a „gene“ level

Multiple genes can produce protein

Multiple genes encode one protein

Result: many „gene“ values map to one pathway nodeAlexander Lex | Harvard University

C

E

E1

E2

E3

E4

CA3

KJ2

RAF

11

R IV: Preserving the Layout

Pathways are available in carefully designed layouts

e.g., KEGG, WikiPathways, Biocarta

Users are familiar with layouts

Goal: preserve layouts as much as possible

Two approaches: Emulate drawing conventions

Use original layoutsAlexander Lex | Harvard University

12

R V: Supporting Multiple Tasks

Two central tasks:Explore topology of pathway

Explore the attributes of the nodes (experimental data)

Need to support both!


C

B

D

F

A

E

Alexander Lex | Harvard University 13

VISUALIZATION TECHNIQUES

Teaser Picture

14


Separate Linked Views Small Multiples


[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]


Path-Extraction

On-Node Mapping

[Lin

droo

s 20

02]

15

On-Node Mapping

Alexander Lex | Harvard University [Lindroos2002]

16

On-Node Mapping


[Westenberg 2008]

[Gehlenborg 2010]

17

On-Node & Tooltip


[Streit 2008]

18

On-Node Mapping

Not scalableespecially when used with „original“ layout

animation not an alternative

Good for overview with homogeneous data

Excellent for topology-based tasks

Bad for attribute-based tasks


19

On-Node Mapping Reflection

R I (Scale)bad if working with static layouts

limited when working with layout adaption

R II (Heterogeneity)bad – can‘t encode multiple datasets

R III (Multi-Mapping)bad – can‘t encode multiple mappings


20

On-Node Mapping Reflection

R IV (Layout-Preservation)excellent!

R V (Multiple Tasks)excellent for topology-based tasks

bad for attribute-based tasks


21

[Lin

droo

s 20

02]

On-Node Mapping


Small Multiples


[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]


Path-Extraction

Separate Linked Views

22



[Shannon 2008]

23



24



25

Separate Linked Views Reflection

R I (Scale)excellent for large numbers of attributes

R II (Heterogeneity)excellent for heterogeneous data

e.g., one view per data type

R III (Multi-Mapping)good – simple highlighting for multiple elements


26

Separate Linked Views Reflection


R V (Multiple Tasks)good for topology-based tasks

good for attribute-based tasks

awful for combining them!Association node-attribute only one by one


27


[Lin

droo

s 20

02]

On-Node Mapping



[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]


Path-Extraction

Small Multiples

28

Small Multiples


29

Small Multiples

Alexander Lex | Harvard University [Barsky 2008]

Video!

30

Small Multiples Reflection

R I (Scale)limited to a handful of conditions/experiments

differences don‘t „pop out“

R II (Heterogeneity)limited for heterogeneous data

e.g., one view per data type

R III (Multi-Mapping)bad – no obvious solution


31

Small Multiples Reflection


R V (Multiple Tasks)good for topology-based tasks

limited for attribute-based tasks

limited for combining them!comparing one by one -> change blindness

Typically requires „focus duplicate“


32


[Lin

droo

s 20

02]

On-Node Mapping


Small Multiples

Linearization

[Mey

er 2

010]


Path-ExtractionLayout Adaption

[Jun

ker 2

006]

33

Layout Adaption

„Moderate“ Layout Adaptionmake space for on-node encoding


[Gehlenborg 2010][Junker 2006]

34

Layout Adaption

„Extreme“ layout adaptionencode information throughposition

Alexander Lex | Harvard University [Bezerianos 2010]

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLiHw5B0Mco

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLiHw5B0Mco



35

Layout Adaption Reflection

R I (Scale)limited to a handful of conditions/experiments

R II (Heterogeneity)limited for heterogeneous data

Different story for „extreme“ layout adaption

R III (Multi-Mapping)OK– give nodes with multi-mappings extra space


36

Layout Adaption Reflection

R IV (Layout-Preservation)not possible

R V (Multiple Tasks)limited for topology-based tasks


limited for combining them!space for trade-off between topology and attribute tasks


37

Layout Adaption

[Jun

ker 2

006]


[Lin

droo

s 20

02]

On-Node Mapping


Small Multiples


Path-ExtractionLinearization

[Mey

er 2

010]

38

Linearization – Pathline


[Meyer 2010]

Combination oflayout adaption

separate linked views

39

Linearization


[Meyer 2010]

40

Linearization Reflection

R I (Scale)good for many experiments

R II (Heterogeneity)good for multiple datasets

R III (Multi-Mapping)good – give nodes with multi-mappings extra space


41

Linearization Reflection

R IV (Layout-Preservation)not possible

R V (Multiple Tasks)limited for topology-based tasks


limited for combining them!

Manual creation of linearized version

Unclear if suitable for more complex pathwaysAlexander Lex | Harvard University

42




[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]

[Lin

droo

s 20

02]


Path-Extraction

43

CALEYDO ENROUTE


44

Pathway View

A

E

C

B

D

F

Pathway View

C

B

D

F

A

E

enRoute View

Concept

Group 1Dataset 1

Group 2Dataset 1

Group 1Dataset 2

B

C

F

A

D

E


45

Pathway View

On-Node Mapping

Path highlighting with Bubble Sets [Collins2009]

SelectionStart- and end node

Iterative adding of nodes

IGF-1

low high


46

enRoute View – Path Representation

• Design of KEGG [Kanehisa2008]

• Abstract branch nodes– Additional topological

information– Incoming vs. outgoing

branches– Expandable

• Branch switching


47

Experimental Data Representation

Gene Expression Data (Numerical)

Copy Number Data (Ordered Categorical)

Mutation Data


48

enRoute View – Putting All Together


49

Video!


http://enroute.caleydo.org

http://enroute.caleydo.org/

50

Glioblastoma Multiforme Example


51

Glioblastoma Multiforme Example


52

enRoute Reflection

R I (Scale)Excellent, can handle large amounts of data

R II (Heterogeneity)Excellent, can handle various datasets

R III (Multi-Mapping)Excellent, can resolve multi-mappings without ambiguity


53

enRoute Reflection

R IV (Layout-Preservation)Excellent - preserves pathway layout

Not preserved in extracted path

R V (Multiple Tasks)Good for topology-based tasks

High-level topology through pathway view

Topology of path in enRoute view

Excellent for attribute-based tasksCan handle large, grouped and heterogeneous data


54

Using enRoute

enRoute part of Caleydo Biomolecular Visualization Framework

http://caleydo.org

Caleydo is free for all – open source project

More in Marc‘s talk!


http://caleydo.org/

55

SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS


Teaser Picture

56

Which to use?



[Mey

er 2

010]

[Jun

ker 2

006]

[Lin

droo

s 20

02]


Path-Extraction

57

Use Technique that fits your task

Topology is important

One experimental condition


On-Node Mapping

[Lindroos2002]

58


Topology is important

Size of graph is limited

Handful of conditions


Small Multiples

59


Experimental data is critical

Pathways are a “sideshow”


[Shannon 2008]


60


Topology & experimental data is important

Data is heterogeneous


Path Extraction

61

What’s Nice About That?

Caleydo supports all of them ;)


62

FUTURE CHALLENGES


Teaser Picture

63

Other Pathway-Related Challenges

Cross-connections between pathways

Alexander Lex | Harvard University [Klukas 2007]

64

Other Pathway-Related Challenges

Effect of compounds (medication) on pathways


[Lounkine 2012]

65

Bridging the Gap

Between Pathways and Experimental Data

Alexander Lex, Harvard [email protected]://caleydo.org

?Marc Streit

Hans-Jörg Schulz Christian Partl

Dieter SchmalstiegPeter J. Park

Nils Gehlenborg


Bridging the Gap Between Pathways and Experimental Data Alexander Lex.

Documents

Transcript of Bridging the Gap Between Pathways and Experimental Data Alexander Lex.