Statistical methods for ranking differentially expressed genes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Broberg P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC193620 | biostudies-literature | 2003
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Statistical methods for ranking differentially expressed genes.
Genome biology 20030529 6
In the analysis of microarray data the identification of differential expression is paramount. Here I outline a method for finding an optimal test statistic with which to rank genes with respect to differential expression. Tests of the method show that it allows generation of top gene lists that give few false positives and few false negatives. Estimation of the false-negative as well as the false-positive rate lies at the heart of the method. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Statistical methods for ranking differentially expressed genes (DEGs) from gene expression data should be evaluated with regard to high sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility. In our previous studies, we evaluated eight gene ranking methods applied to only Affymetrix GeneChip data. A more general evaluation that also includes other microarray platforms, such as the Agilent or Illumina systems, is desirable for determining which methods are suitable for each platform and which method has better inter-platform reproducibility. RESULTS: We compared the eight gene ranking methods using the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) datasets produced by five manufacturers: Affymetrix, Applied Biosystems, Agilent, GE Healthcare, and Illumina. The area under the curve (AUC) was used as a measure for both sensitivity and specificity. Although the highest AUC values can vary with the definition of "true" DEGs, the best methods were, in most cases, either the weighted average difference (WAD), rank products (RP), or intensity-based moderated t statistic (ibmT). The percentages of overlapping genes (POGs) across different test sites were mainly evaluated as a measure for both intra- and inter-platform reproducibility. The POG values for WAD were the highest overall, irrespective of the choice of microarray platform. The high intra- and inter-platform reproducibility of WAD was also observed at a higher biological function level. CONCLUSION: These results for the five microarray platforms were consistent with our previous ones based on 36 real experimental datasets measured using the Affymetrix platform. Thus, recommendations made using the MAQC benchmark data might be universally applicable.
| S-EPMC3128035 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) from microarray data, users of the Affymetrix GeneChip system need to select both a preprocessing algorithm to obtain expression-level measurements and a way of ranking genes to obtain the most plausible candidates. We recently recommended suitable combinations of a preprocessing algorithm and gene ranking method that can be used to identify DEGs with a higher level of sensitivity and specificity. However, in addition to these recommendations, researchers also want to know which combinations enhance reproducibility.ResultsWe compared eight conventional methods for ranking genes: weighted average difference (WAD), average difference (AD), fold change (FC), rank products (RP), moderated t statistic (modT), significance analysis of microarrays (samT), shrinkage t statistic (shrinkT), and intensity-based moderated t statistic (ibmT) with six preprocessing algorithms (PLIER, VSN, FARMS, multi-mgMOS (mmgMOS), MBEI, and GCRMA). A total of 36 real experimental datasets was evaluated on the basis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as a measure for both sensitivity and specificity. We found that the RP method performed well for VSN-, FARMS-, MBEI-, and GCRMA-preprocessed data, and the WAD method performed well for mmgMOS-preprocessed data. Our analysis of the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project's datasets showed that the FC-based gene ranking methods (WAD, AD, FC, and RP) had a higher level of reproducibility: The percentages of overlapping genes (POGs) across different sites for the FC-based methods were higher overall than those for the t-statistic-based methods (modT, samT, shrinkT, and ibmT). In particular, POG values for WAD were the highest overall among the FC-based methods irrespective of the choice of preprocessing algorithm.ConclusionOur results demonstrate that to increase sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility in microarray analyses, we need to select suitable combinations of preprocessing algorithms and gene ranking methods. We recommend the use of FC-based methods, in particular RP or WAD.
| S-EPMC2679019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Microarray technology provides a powerful tool for the expression profile of thousands of genes simultaneously, which makes it possible to explore the molecular and metabolic etiology of the development of a complex disease under study. However, classical statistical methods and technologies fail to be applicable to microarray data. Therefore, it is necessary and motivating to develop powerful methods for large-scale statistical analyses. In this paper, we described a novel method, called Ranking Analysis of Microarray Data (RAM). RAM, which is a large-scale two-sample t-test method, is based on comparisons between a set of ranked T statistics and a set of ranked Z values (a set of ranked estimated null scores) yielded by a "randomly splitting" approach instead of a "permutation" approach and a two-simulation strategy for estimating the proportion of genes identified by chance, i.e., the false discovery rate (FDR). The results obtained from the simulated and observed microarray data show that RAM is more efficient in identification of genes differentially expressed and estimation of FDR under undesirable conditions such as a large fudge factor, small sample size, or mixture distribution of noises than Significance Analysis of Microarrays.
| S-EPMC2584353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oligonucleotide microarrays are a powerful tool for profiling the expression levels of thousands of genes. Different statistical methods for identifying differentially expressed genes can yield different results. To our knowledge, no experimental test has been performed to decide which method best identifies genes that are truly differentially expressed. We applied three statistical methods (dChip, t-test on log-transformed data, and Wilcoxon test) to identify differentially expressed genes in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We used a training set of Affymetrix Hu133A microarray data from 11 patients with unmutated immunoglobulin (Ig) heavy chain variable region (VH) genes and 8 patients with mutated Ig VH genes. Differential expression was validated using semiquantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assays and by validating models to predict the somatic mutation status of an independent test set of nine CLL samples. The methods identified 144 genes that were differentially expressed between cases of CLL with unmutated compared with mutated Ig VH genes. Eighty genes were identified by Wilcoxon test, 60 by t-test, and 65 by dChip, but only 11 were identified by all three methods. Greater agreement was found between the t-test and the Wilcoxon test. Differential expression was validated by semiquantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assays for 83% of individual genes, regardless of the statistical method. However, the Wilcoxon test gave the most accurate predictions on new samples, and dChip, the least accurate. We found that all three methods were equally good for finding differentially expressed genes, but they found different genes. The genes selected by the nonparametric Wilcoxon test are the most robust for predicting the status of new cases. A comprehensive list of all differentially expressed genes can only be obtained by combining the results of multiple statistical tests.
| S-EPMC1867538 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The detection of differentially expressed genes from EST data is of importance for the discovery of potential biological or pharmaceutical targets, especially when studying biological processes in less characterized organisms and where large-scale microarrays are not an option. We present a comparison of five different statistical methods for identifying up-regulated genes through pairwise comparison of EST sets, where one of the sets is generated from a treatment and the other one serves as a control. In addition, we specifically address situations where the sets are relatively small (micro 2,000-10,000 ESTs) and may differ in size. The methods were tested on both simulated and experimentally derived data, and compared to a collection of cold stress induced genes identified by microarrays. We found that combining the method proposed by Audic and Claverie with Fisher's exact test and a method based on calculating the difference in relative frequency was the best combination for maximizing the detection of up-regulated genes. We also introduced the use of a flexible cutoff, which takes the size of the EST sets into consideration. This could be considered as an alternative to a static cutoff. Finally, the detected genes showed a low overlap with those identified by microarrays, which indicates, as in previous studies, low overall concordance between the two platforms.
| S-EPMC2735943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We compared five statistical methods to detect differentially expressed genes between two distinct single-cell populations. Currently, it remains unclear whether differential expression methods developed originally for conventional bulk RNA-seq data can also be applied to single-cell RNA-seq data analysis. Our results in three diverse comparison settings showed marked differences between the different methods in terms of the number of detections as well as their sensitivity and specificity. They, however, did not reveal systematic benefits of the currently available single-cell-specific methods. Instead, our previously introduced reproducibility-optimization method showed good performance in all comparison settings without any single-cell-specific modifications.
| S-EPMC5862313 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Detection of differentially expressed genes is a common task in single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) studies. Various methods based on both bulk-cell and single-cell approaches are in current use. Due to the unique distributional characteristics of single-cell data, it is important to compare these methods with rigorous statistical assessments. In this study, we assess the reproducibility of 9 tools for differential expression analysis in scRNA-seq data. These tools include four methods originally designed for scRNA-seq data, three popular methods originally developed for bulk-cell RNA-seq data but have been applied in scRNA-seq analysis, and two general statistical tests. Instead of comparing the performance across all genes, we compare the methods in terms of the rediscovery rates (RDRs) of top-ranked genes, separately for highly and lowly expressed genes. Three real and one simulated scRNA-seq data sets are used for the comparisons. The results indicate that some widely used methods, such as edgeR and monocle, have worse RDR performances compared to the other methods, especially for the top-ranked genes. For highly expressed genes, many bulk-cell-based methods can perform similarly to the methods designed for scRNA-seq data. But for the lowly expressed genes performance varies substantially; edgeR and monocle are too liberal and have poor control of false positives, while DESeq2 is too conservative and consequently loses sensitivity compared to the other methods. BPSC, Limma, DEsingle, MAST, t-test and Wilcoxon have similar performances in the real data sets. Overall, the scRNA-seq based method BPSC performs well against the other methods, particularly when there is a sufficient number of cells.
| S-EPMC6979262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMelanoma is a highly invasive malignant skin tumor. While melanoma may share some similarities with that of melanocytic nevi, there also exist a number of distinct differences between these conditions. An analysis of these differences may provide a means to more effectively evaluate the etiology and pathogenesis of melanoma. In particular, differences in aberrant methylation expression may prove to represent a critical distinction.MethodsData from gene expression datasets (GSE3189 and GSE46517) and gene methylation datasets (GSE86355 and GSE120878) were downloaded from the GEO database. GEO2R was used to obtain differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and differentially methylation genes (DMGs). Function and pathway enrichment of selected genes were performed using the DAVID database. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was constructed by STRING while its visualization was achieved with use of cytoscape. Primary melanoma samples from TCGA were used to identify significant survival genes.ResultsThere was a total of 199 genes in the hypermethylation-low expression group, while 136 genes in the hypomethylation-high expression group were identified. The former were enriched in the biological processes of transcription regulation, RNA metabolism and regulation of cell proliferation. The later were highly involved in cell cycle regulation. 13 genes were screened out after survival analysis and included: ISG20, DTL, TRPV2, PLOD3, KIF3C, DLGAP4, PI4K2A, WIPI1, SHANK2, SLC16A10, GSTA4O, LFML2A and TMEM47.ConclusionThese findings reveal some of the methylated differentially expressed genes and pathways that exist between melonoma and melanocytic nevi. Moreover, we have identified some critical genes that may help to improve the diagnosis and treatment of melanoma.
| S-EPMC7275674 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to identify the candidate genes of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).MethodsGene expression profiling of 17 ESCC samples and 17 adjacent normal samples, GSE20347, was downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus database. The raw data were preprocessed, and the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between ESCC and normal samples were identified by using SAM software (false discovery rate <0.001). Then, the co-expression network of DEGs was constructed based on Pearson's correlation test (r-value ≥0.8). Furthermore, the topological properties of the co-expression network were analyzed through NetworkAnalyzer (default settings) of Cytoscape. The expression fold changes of DEGs and topological properties were utilized to identify the candidate genes of ESCC (Crin score >4), which were further analyzed based on DAVID functional enrichment analysis (P-value <0.05).ResultsA total of 1,063 DEGs were identified, including 490 up-regulated and 573 down-regulated DEGs. Then, the co-expression network of DEGs was constructed, containing 999 nodes and 46,323 edges. Based on the expression fold changes of DEGs and the topological properties of the co-expression network, DEGs were ranked, and the top 24 genes were candidate genes of ESCC, such as CRISP3, EREG, CXCR2, and CRNN. Furthermore, the 24 genes were significantly enriched in bio-functions regarding cell differentiation, glucan biosynthetic process and immune response.ConclusionThe present study suggested that CRISP3, EREG, CXCR2, and CRNN might be causative genes of ESCC, and play vital roles in the development of ESCC. However, further experimental studies are needed to confirm our results.
| S-EPMC4223754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We have developed a statistical regression modeling approach to discover genes that are differentially expressed between two predefined sample groups in DNA microarray experiments. Our model is based on well-defined assumptions, uses rigorous and well-characterized statistical measures, and accounts for the heterogeneity and genomic complexity of the data. In contrast to cluster analysis, which attempts to define groups of genes and/or samples that share common overall expression profiles, our modeling approach uses known sample group membership to focus on expression profiles of individual genes in a sensitive and robust manner. Further, this approach can be used to test statistical hypotheses about gene expression. To demonstrate this methodology, we compared the expression profiles of 11 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and 27 acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) samples from a previous study (Golub et al. 1999) and found 141 genes differentially expressed between AML and ALL with a 1% significance at the genomic level. Using this modeling approach to compare different sample groups within the AML samples, we identified a group of genes whose expression profiles correlated with that of thrombopoietin and found that genes whose expression associated with AML treatment outcome lie in recurrent chromosomal locations. Our results are compared with those obtained using t-tests or Wilcoxon rank sum statistics.
| S-EPMC311075 | biostudies-literature