ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2005
Biological validation of differentially expressed genes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia identified by applying multiple statistical methods to oligonucleotide microarrays.
Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experimental validation of methods for differential gene expression analysis and sample pooling in RNA-seq.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Optimizing high dimensional gene expression studies for immune response following smallpox vaccination using Taqman® low density immune arrays.Journal of immunological methods · 2011Article
- A two-gene signature, SKI and SLAMF1, predicts time-to-treatment in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.PloS one · 2011Article
- Identification and validation of biomarkers of IgV(H) mutation status in chronic lymphocytic leukemia using microfluidics quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction technology.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.