Abstract
Module‐based methods have made much progress in deconstructing biological networks. However, it is a great challenge to quantitatively compare the topological structural variations of modules (allosteric modules [AMs]) under different situations. A total of 23, 42, and 15 coexpression modules were identified in baicalin (BA), jasminoidin (JA), and ursodeoxycholic acid (UA) in a global anti‐ischemic mice network, respectively. Then, we integrated the methods of module‐based consensus ratio (MCR) and modified Zsummary module statistic to validate 12 BA, 22 JA, and 8 UA on‐modules based on comparing with vehicle. The MCRs for pairwise comparisons were 1.55% (BA vs. JA), 1.45% (BA vs. UA), and 1.27% (JA vs. UA), respectively. Five conserved allosteric modules (CAMs) and 17 unique allosteric modules (UAMs) were identified among these groups. In conclusion, module‐centric analysis may provide us a unique approach to understand multiple pharmacological mechanisms associated with differential phenotypes in the era of modular pharmacology.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
