Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23335952›Full record

ArticleThe annals of applied statistics2012

Exact statistical tests for the intersection of independent lists of genes.

Loki Natarajan, Minya Pu, Karen Messer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The annals of applied statistics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Finding genetic overlaps among diseases based on ranked gene lists.Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Deciding whether follow-up studies have replicated findings in a preliminary large-scale omics study.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  11. Metabolomics reveals signature of mitochondrial dysfunction in diabetic kidney disease.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2013 · on this map
    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

3 authors.

Loki NatarajanDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics UCSD School of Medicine Moores UCSD Cancer Center # 0901 University of California, La Jolla, CA 92093.
Minya Pu
Karen Messer

Funding

VIRAL MALIGNANCYP30CA023100 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Jesse Nodora · 1985 to 2026
$124.9M
iDASH: Integrating Data for Analysis, Anonymization, and SharingU54HL108460 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI OHNO-MACHADO, LUCILA · 2010 to 2015
$19.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023100NHLBI NIH HHS U54 HL108460
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public data repositories have enabled researchers to compare results across multiple genomic studies in order to replicate findings. A common approach is to first rank genes according to an hypothesis of interest within each study. Then, lists of the top-ranked genes within each study are compared across studies. Genes recaptured as highly ranked (usually above some threshold) in multiple studies are considered to be significant. However, this comparison strategy often remains informal, in that Type I error and false discovery rate are usually uncontrolled. In this paper, we formalize an inferential strategy for this kind of list-intersection discovery test. We show how to compute a p-value associated with a `recaptured' set of genes, using a closed-form Poisson approximation to the distribution of the size of the recaptured set. The distribution of the test statistic depends on the rank threshold and the number of studies within which a gene must be recaptured. We use a Poisson approximation to investigate operating characteristics of the test. We give practical guidance on how to design a bioinformatic list-intersection study with prespecified control of Type I error (at the set level) and false discovery rate (at the gene level). We show how choice of test parameters will affect the expected proportion of significant genes identified. We present a strategy for identifying optimal choice of parameters, depending on the particular alternative hypothesis which might hold. We illustrate our methods using prostate cancer gene-expression datasets from the curated Oncomine database.

Identifiers

PMID23335952
PMCPMC3546508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.