Difference between revisions of "YeonJung Mun"
imported>S |
imported>S |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
<h1><span style="font-size: x-large"><b>Genomics</b></span></h1> | <h1><span style="font-size: x-large"><b>Genomics</b></span></h1> | ||
<p>Genomics is the study of the whole genetic system involving the sequencing of DNA, analyzing structure and function of genes, and more.</p> | <p>Genomics is the study of the whole genetic system involving the sequencing of DNA, analyzing structure and function of genes, and more.</p> | ||
| + | <p> </p> | ||
<h3>The Human Cancer Genome Project</h3> | <h3>The Human Cancer Genome Project</h3> | ||
<p> A group of scientists works on a megaproject which aims to catalog all somatic mutations from primary tumors. By detecting major oncogenes and regulatory regions, clinical treatment can be applied in order to fight cancer. By this way, there would be less or none gene products of mutated regions, thus suppressing cancer. <br /> | <p> A group of scientists works on a megaproject which aims to catalog all somatic mutations from primary tumors. By detecting major oncogenes and regulatory regions, clinical treatment can be applied in order to fight cancer. By this way, there would be less or none gene products of mutated regions, thus suppressing cancer. <br /> | ||
However, questions arise: are primary tumors the appropriate focus for the cure and therapeutic use for cancer? Experiments of treatment intervening in cancer networks at a single oncoprotein or tumor suppressor protein have bought mixed results. The approach was affective in some types of cancers, but the most deadly ones like breast, prostate, and lung cancer, the effect was rather insignificant. Therefore, the author of this paper doubts this megaproject because of two main reasons. First, even though curing primary tumor-related gene is effective, it is unlikely to eradicate cells that have already left the tumor and that are evolving along different genomic trajectories. Second, evidences on the effects of methylation changes on tumors and relevance between aneuploidy and caner are increasing. These study areas might be alternative breakthroughs.<br /> | However, questions arise: are primary tumors the appropriate focus for the cure and therapeutic use for cancer? Experiments of treatment intervening in cancer networks at a single oncoprotein or tumor suppressor protein have bought mixed results. The approach was affective in some types of cancers, but the most deadly ones like breast, prostate, and lung cancer, the effect was rather insignificant. Therefore, the author of this paper doubts this megaproject because of two main reasons. First, even though curing primary tumor-related gene is effective, it is unlikely to eradicate cells that have already left the tumor and that are evolving along different genomic trajectories. Second, evidences on the effects of methylation changes on tumors and relevance between aneuploidy and caner are increasing. These study areas might be alternative breakthroughs.<br /> | ||
In conclusion, as the author says that “the human cancer genome project is fundamentally flawed”, questions remain for the role of genomics in cancer treatment. Would they still take the big part in cancer treatments? Or was the cancer genome project just a waste of effort? The answers can be disputable depending on situations, but I still believe that the project was significant. Thanks to the work, the information of cancer-causing gene and its regulatory sites have been discovered. While the appliance to clinical use is uncertain, the study was worth a shot.<br /> | In conclusion, as the author says that “the human cancer genome project is fundamentally flawed”, questions remain for the role of genomics in cancer treatment. Would they still take the big part in cancer treatments? Or was the cancer genome project just a waste of effort? The answers can be disputable depending on situations, but I still believe that the project was significant. Thanks to the work, the information of cancer-causing gene and its regulatory sites have been discovered. While the appliance to clinical use is uncertain, the study was worth a shot.<br /> | ||
| − | </p> | + | <br /> |
| + | <span style="font-family: Times New Roman"> </span><cite><a name="_ENREF_1"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ascii-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-fareast-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-hansi-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-no-proof: yes"><font size="2">Miklos, George L Gabor. "The Human Cancer Genome Project—One More Misstep in the War on Cancer." </font><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal"><font size="2">Nature biotechnology </font></i><font size="2">23.5 (2005): 535-37. Print.</font></span></span></a></cite><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ascii-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-fareast-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-hansi-font-family: "맑은 고딕"; mso-no-proof: yes"><o:p></o:p></span></p> | ||
<div> | <div> | ||
<h1>Transcriptomics</h1> | <h1>Transcriptomics</h1> | ||
Revision as of 06:06, 15 May 2015
In bioinformatics, biological data are considered as information rather than the organism itself. With the help of bioprogramming the data can be analyzed and studied in forms of statistical or computational use.
Contents
Bioinformatics
Bioinformatics is the combination of two words: biology and information. In this field of study, biological subjects are considered differently than living organisms. Rather, all biological data are regarded as information. Simply put, the major difference between biology and bioinformatics is the difference in views of biological data. Therefore in bioinformatics, the data can be analyzed and studied using statistical or computational programs using computers.
Bioprogramming
Bioprogramming is all programming activities for analyzing biological data.
Programming
Programming is a process that makes new algorithm from programming languages called codes through a compiler. It can convert a set of programming languages into executable programs. Programs can perform various activities like computation, analysis, algorithmic flow, and more.
The computer is the electrical machine or device that carries out the programs. Computers exist in many different forms such as desktop, laptop, tablet, and etc.
Compiler
Compiler is a program that transforms programming languages into computer languages. With this process, computer can recognize the commands. The compilers have own specific programming language. C++, for example, has c language. They are classified according to the languages and the operating systems.
Programming language
Programming languages are generally high-level languages that are used in coding by programmers.If you compare the programming to a country, then the language is the communication medium. The 3 major types of bioprogramming languages are S, R, and Matlab. All of them are for statistical and computational use. Grammar is the rule of the languages.
Perl programming
Perl is a programming language that supports scripts called a script lanuguage. It is developed by Larry wall in 1987. It is a powerful tool for varied applications such as network programming, finance, and bioinformatics. An operating system of perl is basically Linux but almost systems support the program.
(www.perl.org)
BioPerl programming
BioPerl is a collection of Perl modules for biological data processing. It is an open source software for biological applications in bioinformatics. In the Human Genome Project, the program has played a central role.
(www.bioperl.org)
BioOS
BioOS denotes an operationg system for bioinformatics
(www.bioos.org)
Genomics
Genomics is the study of the whole genetic system involving the sequencing of DNA, analyzing structure and function of genes, and more.
The Human Cancer Genome Project
A group of scientists works on a megaproject which aims to catalog all somatic mutations from primary tumors. By detecting major oncogenes and regulatory regions, clinical treatment can be applied in order to fight cancer. By this way, there would be less or none gene products of mutated regions, thus suppressing cancer.
However, questions arise: are primary tumors the appropriate focus for the cure and therapeutic use for cancer? Experiments of treatment intervening in cancer networks at a single oncoprotein or tumor suppressor protein have bought mixed results. The approach was affective in some types of cancers, but the most deadly ones like breast, prostate, and lung cancer, the effect was rather insignificant. Therefore, the author of this paper doubts this megaproject because of two main reasons. First, even though curing primary tumor-related gene is effective, it is unlikely to eradicate cells that have already left the tumor and that are evolving along different genomic trajectories. Second, evidences on the effects of methylation changes on tumors and relevance between aneuploidy and caner are increasing. These study areas might be alternative breakthroughs.
In conclusion, as the author says that “the human cancer genome project is fundamentally flawed”, questions remain for the role of genomics in cancer treatment. Would they still take the big part in cancer treatments? Or was the cancer genome project just a waste of effort? The answers can be disputable depending on situations, but I still believe that the project was significant. Thanks to the work, the information of cancer-causing gene and its regulatory sites have been discovered. While the appliance to clinical use is uncertain, the study was worth a shot.
Miklos, George L Gabor. "The Human Cancer Genome Project—One More Misstep in the War on Cancer." Nature biotechnology 23.5 (2005): 535-37. Print.<o:p></o:p>
