4.8 Article

SC3: consensus clustering of single-cell RNA-seq data

Journal

NATURE METHODS
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages 483-+

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/NMETH.4236

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [104710/Z/14/Z, 095645/Z/11/Z]
  2. FRS-FNRS
  3. Belgian Network DYSCO (Dynamical Systems, Control and Optimisation) - Interuniversity Attraction Poles Programme
  4. Belgian State Science Policy Office
  5. ARC (Action de Recherche Concerte) on Mining and Optimization of Big Data Models - Wallonia-Brussels Federation
  6. EPSRC [EP/N014529/1]
  7. Sanger Institute
  8. University of Edinburgh
  9. Bloodwise [13003]
  10. Medical Research Council
  11. Kay Kendall Leukaemia Fund
  12. Cambridge NIHR Biomedical Research Center
  13. Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre
  14. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society of America [07037]
  15. MRC
  16. BBSRC [BB/K010867/1]
  17. EU BLUEPRINT
  18. EpiGeneSys
  19. Wellcome Trust [104710/Z/14/Z, 095645/Z/11/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust
  20. BBSRC [BBS/E/B/000C0426] Funding Source: UKRI
  21. EPSRC [EP/N014529/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  22. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/B/000C0426] Funding Source: researchfish
  23. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N014529/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  24. Medical Research Council [MC_PC_12009] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Single-cell RNA-seq enables the quantitative characterization of cell types based on global transcriptome profiles. We present single-cell consensus clustering (SC3), a user-friendly tool for unsupervised clustering, which achieves high accuracy and robustness by combining multiple clustering solutions through a consensus approach (http://bioconductor.org/packages/SC3). We demonstrate that SC3 is capable of identifying subclones from the transcriptomes of neoplastic cells collected from patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available