MOTIVATION: The distinct functionalities of human tissues and cell types underlie complex phenotype-genotype relationships, yet often remain elusive. Harnessing the multitude of bulk and single-cell human transcriptomes while focusing on processes can help reveal these distinct functionalities. RESULTS: The Tissue-Process Activity (TiPA) method aims to identify processes that are preferentially active or under-expressed in specific contexts, by comparing the expression levels of process genes between contexts. We tested TiPA on 1579 tissue-specific processes and bulk tissue transcriptomes, finding that it performed better than another method. Next, we used TiPA to ask whether the activity of certain processes could underlie the tissue-specific manifestation of 1233 hereditary diseases. We found that 21% of the disease-causing genes indeed participated in such processes, thereby illuminating their genotype-phenotype relationships. Lastly, we applied TiPA to single-cell transcriptomes of 108 human cell types, revealing that process activities often match cell-type identities and can thus aid annotation efforts. Hence, differential activity of processes can highlight the distinct functionality of tissues and cells in a robust and meaningful manner. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: TiPA code is available in GitHub (https://github.com/moranshar/TiPA). In addition, all data are available as part of the Supplementary Material. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

MOTIVATION: Differential network analysis, designed to highlight network changes between conditions, is an important paradigm in network biology. However, differential network analysis methods have been typically designed to compare between two conditions and were rarely applied to multiple protein interaction networks (interactomes). Importantly, large-scale benchmarks for their evaluation have been lacking. RESULTS: Here, we present a framework for assessing the ability of differential network analysis of multiple human tissue interactomes to highlight tissue-selective processes and disorders. For this, we created a benchmark of 6499 curated tissue-specific Gene Ontology biological processes. We applied five methods, including four differential network analysis methods, to construct weighted interactomes for 34 tissues. Rigorous assessment of this benchmark revealed that differential analysis methods perform well in revealing tissue-selective processes (AUCs of 0.82-0.9). Next, we applied differential network analysis to illuminate the genes underlying tissue-selective hereditary disorders. For this, we curated a dataset of 1305 tissue-specific hereditary disorders and their manifesting tissues. Focusing on subnetworks containing the top 1% differential interactions in disease-relevant tissue interactomes revealed significant enrichment for disorder-causing genes in 18.6% of the cases, with a significantly high success rate for blood, nerve, muscle and heart diseases. SUMMARY: Altogether, we offer a framework that includes expansive manually curated datasets of tissue-selective processes and disorders to be used as benchmarks or to illuminate tissue-selective processes and genes. Our results demonstrate that differential analysis of multiple human tissue interactomes is a powerful tool for highlighting processes and genes with tissue-selective functionality and clinical impact. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Datasets are available as part of the Supplementary data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.