Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19390667›Full record

ArticleCancer informatics2007

Application of gene shaving and mixture models to cluster microarray gene expression data.

K-A Do, G J McLachlan, R Bean, S Wen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer informatics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

K-A DoUniversity of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA. kim@mdanderson.org
G J McLachlan
R Bean
S Wen

Funding

University of Texas SPORE in Prostate CancerP50CA090270 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI LOGOTHETIS, CHRISTOPHER J. · 2001 to 2007
$13.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA090270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researchers are frequently faced with the analysis of microarray data of a relatively large number of genes using a small number of tissue samples. We examine the application of two statistical methods for clustering such microarray expression data: EMMIX-GENE and GeneClust. EMMIX-GENE is a mixture-model based clustering approach, designed primarily to cluster tissue samples on the basis of the genes. GeneClust is an implementation of the gene shaving methodology, motivated by research to identify distinct sets of genes for which variation in expression could be related to a biological property of the tissue samples. We illustrate the use of these two methods in the analysis of Affymetrix oligonucleotide arrays of well-known data sets from colon tissue samples with and without tumors, and of tumor tissue samples from patients with leukemia. Although the two approaches have been developed from different perspectives, the results demonstrate a clear correspondence between gene clusters produced by GeneClust and EMMIX-GENE for the colon tissue data. It is demonstrated, for the case of ribosomal proteins and smooth muscle genes in the colon data set, that both methods can classify genes into co-regulated families. It is further demonstrated that tissue types (tumor and normal) can be separated on the basis of subtle distributed patterns of genes. Application to the leukemia tissue data produces a division of tissues corresponding closely to the external classification, acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), for both methods. In addition, we also identify genes specific for the subgroup of ALL-Tcell samples. Overall, we find that the gene shaving method produces gene clusters at great speed; allows variable cluster sizes and can incorporate partial or full supervision; and finds clusters of genes in which the gene expression varies greatly over the tissue samples while maintaining a high level of coherence between the gene expression profiles. The intent of the EMMIX-GENE method is to cluster the tissue samples. It performs a filtering step that results in a subset of relevant genes, followed by gene clustering, and then tissue clustering, and is favorable in its accuracy of ranking the clusters produced.

Identifiers

PMID19390667
PMCPMC2666952

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.