ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011
Mulcom: a multiple comparison statistical test for microarray data in Bioconductor.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Lung Transcriptomics during Protective Ventilatory Support in Sepsis-Induced Acute Lung Injury.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany microarray experiments search for genes with differential expression between a common "reference" group and multiple "test" groups. In such cases currently employed statistical approaches based on t-tests or close derivatives have limited efficacy, mainly because estimation of the standard error is done on only two groups at a time. Alternative approaches based on ANOVA correctly capture within-group variance from all the groups, but then do not confront single test groups with the reference. Ideally, a t-test better suited for this type of data would compare each test group with the reference, but use within-group variance calculated from all the groups.
resultsWe implemented an R-Bioconductor package named Mulcom, with a statistical test derived from the Dunnett's t-test, designed to compare multiple test groups individually against a common reference. Interestingly, the Dunnett's test uses for the denominator of each comparison a within-group standard error aggregated from all the experimental groups. In addition to the basic Dunnett's t value, the package includes an optional minimal fold-change threshold, m. Due to the automated, permutation-based estimation of False Discovery Rate (FDR), the package also permits fast optimization of the test, to obtain the maximum number of significant genes at a given FDR value. When applied to a time-course experiment profiled in parallel on two microarray platforms, and compared with two commonly used tests, Mulcom displayed better concordance of significant genes in the two array platforms (39% vs. 26% or 15%), and higher enrichment in functional annotation to categories related to the biology of the experiment (p value < 0.001 in 4 categories vs. 3).
conclusionsThe Mulcom package provides a powerful tool for the identification of differentially expressed genes when several experimental conditions are compared against a common reference. The results of the practical example presented here show that lists of differentially expressed genes generated by Mulcom are particularly consistent across microarray platforms and enriched in genes belonging to functionally significant groups.
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.