Empirical evaluation of data transformations and ranking statistics for microarray analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Qin LX
PROVIDER: S-EPMC524279 | biostudies-literature | 2004
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Empirical evaluation of data transformations and ranking statistics for microarray analysis.
Qin Li-Xuan LX Kerr Kathleen F KF
Nucleic acids research 20041012 18
There are many options in handling microarray data that can affect study conclusions, sometimes drastically. Working with a two-color platform, this study uses ten spike-in microarray experiments to evaluate the relative effectiveness of some of these options for the experimental goal of detecting differential expression. We consider two data transformations, background subtraction and intensity normalization, as well as six different statistics for detecting differentially expressed genes. Find ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMicroarray technology provides an efficient means for globally exploring physiological processes governed by the coordinated expression of multiple genes. However, identification of genes differentially expressed in microarray experiments is challenging because of their potentially high type I error rate. Methods for large-scale statistical analyses have been developed but most of them are applicable to two-sample or two-condition data.ResultsWe developed a large-scale multiple-group F-test based method, named ranking analysis of F-statistics (RAF), which is an extension of ranking analysis of microarray data (RAM) for two-sample t-test. In this method, we proposed a novel random splitting approach to generate the null distribution instead of using permutation, which may not be appropriate for microarray data. We also implemented a two-simulation strategy to estimate the false discovery rate. Simulation results suggested that it has higher efficiency in finding differentially expressed genes among multiple classes at a lower false discovery rate than some commonly used methods. By applying our method to the experimental data, we found 107 genes having significantly differential expressions among 4 treatments at <0.7% FDR, of which 31 belong to the expressed sequence tags (ESTs), 76 are unique genes who have known functions in the brain or central nervous system and belong to six major functional groups.ConclusionOur method is suitable to identify differentially expressed genes among multiple groups, in particular, when sample size is small.
| S-EPMC2323973 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) thresholds for microarray data analysis were experimentally determined with an oligonucleotide array that contained perfect-match (PM) and mismatch (MM) probes based upon four genes from Shewanella oneidensis MR-1. A new SNR calculation, called the signal-to-both-standard-deviations ratio (SSDR), was developed and evaluated, along with other two methods, the signal-to-standard-deviation ratio (SSR) and the signal-to-background ratio (SBR). At a low stringency, the thresholds of the SSR, SBR, and SSDR were 2.5, 1.60, and 0.80 with an oligonucleotide and a PCR amplicon as target templates and 2.0, 1.60, and 0.70 with genomic DNAs as target templates. Slightly higher thresholds were obtained under high-stringency conditions. The thresholds of the SSR and SSDR decreased with an increase in the complexity of targets (e.g., target types) and the presence of background DNA and a decrease in the compositions of targets, while the SBR remained unchanged in all situations. The lowest percentage of false positives and false negatives was observed with the SSDR calculation method, suggesting that it may be a better SNR calculation for more accurate determination of SNR thresholds. Positive spots identified by SNR thresholds were verified by the Student t test, and consistent results were observed. This study provides general guidance for users to select appropriate SNR thresholds for different samples under different hybridization conditions.
| S-EPMC2394959 | 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:BACKGROUND: Several preprocessing methods are available for the analysis of Affymetrix Genechips arrays. The most popular algorithms analyze the measured fluorescence intensities with statistical methods. Here we focus on a novel algorithm, AffyILM, available from Bioconductor, which relies on inputs from hybridization thermodynamics and uses an extended Langmuir isotherm model to compute transcript concentrations. These concentrations are then employed in the statistical analysis. We compared the performance of AffyILM and other traditional methods both in the old and in the newest generation of GeneChips. RESULTS: Tissue mixture and Latin Square datasets (provided by Affymetrix) were used to assess the performances of the differential expression analysis depending on the preprocessing strategy. A correlation analysis conducted on the tissue mixture data reveals that the median-polish algorithm allows to best summarize AffyILM concentrations computed at the probe-level. Those correlation results are equivalent to the best correlations observed using popular preprocessing methods relying on intensity values. The performances of each tested preprocessing algorithm were quantified using the Latin Square HG-U133A dataset, thanks to the comparison of differential analysis results with the list of spiked genes. The figures of merit generated illustrates that the performances associated to AffyILM(medianpolish), inferred from the present statistical analysis, are comparable to the best performing strategies previously reported. CONCLUSIONS: Converting probe intensities to estimates of target concentrations prior to the statistical analysis, AffyILM(medianpolish) is one of the best performing strategy currently available. Using hybridization theory, probe-level estimates of target concentrations should be identically distributed. In the future, a probe-level multivariate analysis of the concentrations should be compared to the univariate analysis of probe-set summarized expression data.
| S-EPMC3267830 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundMicroarray data enables the high-throughput survey of mRNA expression profiles at the genomic level; however, he data presents a challenging statistical problem because of the large number of transcripts with small sample sizes that are obtained. To reduce the dimensionality, various Bayesian or empirical Bayes hierarchical models have been developed. However, because of the complexity of the microarray data, no model can explain the data fully. It is generally difficult to scrutinize the irregular patterns of expression that are not expected by the usual statistical gene by gene models.ResultsAs an extension of empirical Bayes (EB) procedures, we have developed the ?-empirical Bayes (?-EB) approach based on a ?-likelihood measure which can be regarded as an 'evidence-based' weighted (quasi-) likelihood inference. The weight of a transcript t is described as a power function of its likelihood, f?(yt|?). Genes with low likelihoods have unexpected expression patterns and low weights. By assigning low weights to outliers, the inference becomes robust. The value of ?, which controls the balance between the robustness and efficiency, is selected by maximizing the predictive ??-likelihood by cross-validation. The proposed ?-EB approach identified six significant (p<10??) contaminated transcripts as differentially expressed (DE) in normal/tumor tissues from the head and neck of cancer patients. These six genes were all confirmed to be related to cancer; they were not identified as DE genes by the classical EB approach. When applied to the eQTL analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana, the proposed ?-EB approach identified some potential master regulators that were missed by the EB approach.ConclusionsThe simulation data and real gene expression data showed that the proposed ?-EB method was robust against outliers. The distribution of the weights was used to scrutinize the irregular patterns of expression and diagnose the model statistically. When ?-weights outside the range of the predicted distribution were observed, a detailed inspection of the data was carried out. The ?-weights described here can be applied to other likelihood-based statistical models for diagnosis, and may serve as a useful tool for transcriptome and proteome studies.
| S-EPMC3464654 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we empirically evaluated the consistency and accuracy of five different methods to detect differentially expressed genes (DEGs) based on microarray data.Five different methods were compared, including the t-test, significance analysis of microarrays (SAM), the empirical Bayes t-test (eBayes), t-tests relative to a threshold (TREAT), and assumption adequacy averaging (AAA). The percentage of overlapping genes (POG) and the percentage of overlapping genes related (POGR) scores were used to rank the different methods on their ability to maintain a consistent list of DEGs both within the same data set and across two different data sets concerning the same disease. The power of each method was evaluated based on a simulation approach which mimics the multivariate distribution of the original microarray data.For smaller sample sizes (6 or less per group), moderated versions of the t-test (SAM, eBayes, and TREAT) were superior in terms of both power and consistency relative to the t-test and AAA, with TREAT having the highest consistency in each scenario. Differences in consistency were most pronounced for comparisons between two different data sets for the same disease. For larger sample sizes AAA had the highest power for detecting small effect sizes, while TREAT had the lowest.For smaller sample sizes moderated versions of the t-test can generally be recommended, while for larger sample sizes selection of a method to detect DEGs may involve a compromise between consistency and power.
| S-EPMC3993975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo empirically explore the level of agreement of the treatment hierarchies from different ranking metrics in network meta-analysis (NMA) and to investigate how network characteristics influence the agreement.DesignEmpirical evaluation from re-analysis of NMA.Data232 networks of four or more interventions from randomised controlled trials, published between 1999 and 2015.MethodsWe calculated treatment hierarchies from several ranking metrics: relative treatment effects, probability of producing the best value [Formula: see text] and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We estimated the level of agreement between the treatment hierarchies using different measures: Kendall's τ and Spearman's ρ correlation; and the Yilmaz [Formula: see text] and Average Overlap, to give more weight to the top of the rankings. Finally, we assessed how the amount of the information present in a network affects the agreement between treatment hierarchies, using the average variance, the relative range of variance and the total sample size over the number of interventions of a network.ResultsOverall, the pairwise agreement was high for all treatment hierarchies obtained by the different ranking metrics. The highest agreement was observed between SUCRA and the relative treatment effect for both correlation and top-weighted measures whose medians were all equal to 1. The agreement between rankings decreased for networks with less precise estimates and the hierarchies obtained from [Formula: see text] appeared to be the most sensitive to large differences in the variance estimates. However, such large differences were rare.ConclusionsDifferent ranking metrics address different treatment hierarchy problems, however they produced similar rankings in the published networks. Researchers reporting NMA results can use the ranking metric they prefer, unless there are imprecise estimates or large imbalances in the variance estimates. In this case treatment hierarchies based on both probabilistic and non-probabilistic ranking metrics should be presented.
| S-EPMC7440831 | biostudies-literature
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:BACKGROUND:DNA methylation offers an excellent example for elucidating how epigenetic information affects gene expression. ? values and M values are commonly used to quantify DNA methylation. Statistical methods applicable to DNA methylation data analysis span a number of approaches such as Wilcoxon rank sum test, t-test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, permutation test, empirical Bayes method, and bump hunting method. Nonetheless, selection of an optimal statistical method can be challenging when different methods generate inconsistent results from the same data set. RESULTS:We compared six statistical approaches relevant to DNA methylation microarray analysis in terms of false discovery rate control, statistical power, and stability through simulation studies and real data examples. Observable differences were noticed between ? values and M values only when methylation levels were correlated across CpG loci. For small sample size (n=3 or 6 in each group), both the empirical Bayes and bump hunting methods showed appropriate FDR control and the highest power when methylation levels across CpG loci were independent. Only the bump hunting method showed appropriate FDR control and the highest power when methylation levels across CpG sites were correlated. For medium (n=12 in each group) and large sample sizes (n=24 in each group), all methods compared had similar power, except for the permutation test whenever the proportion of differentially methylated loci was low. For all sample sizes, the bump hunting method had the lowest stability in terms of standard deviation of total discoveries whenever the proportion of differentially methylated loci was large. The apparent test power comparisons based on raw p-values from DNA methylation studies on ovarian cancer and rheumatoid arthritis provided results as consistent as those obtained in the simulation studies. Overall, these results provide guidance for optimal statistical methods selection under different scenarios. CONCLUSIONS:For DNA methylation studies with small sample size, the bump hunting method and the empirical Bayes method are recommended when DNA methylation levels across CpG loci are independent, while only the bump hunting method is recommended when DNA methylation levels are correlated across CpG loci. All methods are acceptable for medium or large sample sizes.
| S-EPMC4497424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Microarray technology has made it possible to simultaneously monitor the expression levels of thousands of genes in a single experiment. However, the large number of genes greatly increases the challenges of analyzing, comprehending and interpreting the resulting mass of data. Selecting a subset of important genes is inevitable to address the challenge. Gene selection has been investigated extensively over the last decade. Most selection procedures, however, are not sufficient for accurate inference of underlying biology, because biological significance does not necessarily have to be statistically significant. Additional biological knowledge needs to be integrated into the gene selection procedure. RESULTS: We propose a general framework for gene ranking. We construct a bipartite graph from the Gene Ontology (GO) and gene expression data. The graph describes the relationship between genes and their associated molecular functions. Under a species condition, edge weights of the graph are assigned to be gene expression level. Such a graph provides a mathematical means to represent both species-independent and species-dependent biological information. We also develop a new ranking algorithm to analyze the weighted graph via a kernelized spatial depth (KSD) approach. Consequently, the importance of gene and molecular function can be simultaneously ranked by a real-valued measure, KSD, which incorporates the global and local structure of the graph. Over-expressed and under-regulated genes also can be separately ranked. CONCLUSION: The gene-function bigraph integrates molecular function annotations into gene expression data. The relevance of genes is described in the graph (through a common function). The proposed method provides an exploratory framework for gene data analysis.
| S-EPMC3226190 | biostudies-literature