ArticleBMC bioinformatics2013
Parallel comparison of Illumina RNA-Seq and Affymetrix microarray platforms on transcriptomic profiles generated from 5-aza-deoxy-cytidine treated HT-29 colon cancer cells and simulated datasets.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 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
63 citing papers in PubMed, 148 citations in OpenAlex.
- Basal Differences in the Transcriptional Profiles of Tomato Roots Associated with the Presence/Absence of the Resistance GenePlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Role of Microarray in Modern Sequencing: Statistical Approach Matters in a Comparison Between Microarray and RNA-Seq.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2025Article
- Applications of gene pair methods in clinical research: advancing precision medicine.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
- Analysis of nuclear receptor expression in head and neck cancer.Cancer genetics · 2025Article
- Nonparametric Biomarker Based Treatment Selection With Reproducibility Data.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- A network-based trans-omics approach for predicting synergistic drug combinations.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- NCBI GEO: archive for gene expression and epigenomics data sets: 23-year update.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Ambiguous genes due to aligners and their impact on RNA-seq data analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Identification of GUCA2A and COL3A1 as prognostic biomarkers in colorectal cancer by integrating analysis of RNA-Seq data and qRT-PCR validation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Deep Learning Approaches for lncRNA-Mediated Mechanisms: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Developments.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Machine learning for multi-omics data integration in cancer.iScience · 2022Review
- Comprehensive Analysis of TRIM Family Genes in Hepatitis Virus B-Related Hepatoma Carcinoma.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Severe, but not moderate asthmatics share blood transcriptomic changes with post-traumatic stress disorder and depression.PloS one · 2022Article
- Article
- Rapid Transient Transcriptional Adaptation to Hypergravity in Jurkat T Cells Revealed by Comparative Analysis of Microarray and RNA-Seq Data.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Cancer immunotherapy by NC410, a LAIR-2 Fc protein blocking human LAIR-collagen interaction.eLife · 2021Article
- Population transcriptomic sequencing reveals allopatric divergence and local adaptation in Pseudotaxus chienii (Taxaceae).BMC genomics · 2021Article
- PRPS-ST: A protocol-agnostic self-training method for gene expression-based classification of blood cancers.Blood cancer discovery · 2020Article
- Landscape of transcriptome variations uncovering known and novel driver events in colorectal carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Reactivation of oncogenes involved in G1/S transcription and apoptosis pathways by low dose decitabine promotes HT29 human colon cancer cell growth in vitro.American journal of translational research · 2020Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh throughput parallel sequencing, RNA-Seq, has recently emerged as an appealing alternative to microarray in identifying differentially expressed genes (DEG) between biological groups. However, there still exists considerable discrepancy on gene expression measurements and DEG results between the two platforms. The objective of this study was to compare parallel paired-end RNA-Seq and microarray data generated on 5-azadeoxy-cytidine (5-Aza) treated HT-29 colon cancer cells with an additional simulation study.
methodsWe first performed general correlation analysis comparing gene expression profiles on both platforms. An Errors-In-Variables (EIV) regression model was subsequently applied to assess proportional and fixed biases between the two technologies. Then several existing algorithms, designed for DEG identification in RNA-Seq and microarray data, were applied to compare the cross-platform overlaps with respect to DEG lists, which were further validated using qRT-PCR assays on selected genes. Functional analyses were subsequently conducted using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA).
resultsPearson and Spearman correlation coefficients between the RNA-Seq and microarray data each exceeded 0.80, with 66%~68% overlap of genes on both platforms. The EIV regression model indicated the existence of both fixed and proportional biases between the two platforms. The DESeq and baySeq algorithms (RNA-Seq) and the SAM and eBayes algorithms (microarray) achieved the highest cross-platform overlap rate in DEG results from both experimental and simulated datasets. DESeq method exhibited a better control on the false discovery rate than baySeq on the simulated dataset although it performed slightly inferior to baySeq in the sensitivity test. RNA-Seq and qRT-PCR, but not microarray data, confirmed the expected reversal of SPARC gene suppression after treating HT-29 cells with 5-Aza. Thirty-three IPA canonical pathways were identified by both microarray and RNA-Seq data, 152 pathways by RNA-Seq data only, and none by microarray data only.
conclusionsThese results suggest that RNA-Seq has advantages over microarray in identification of DEGs with the most consistent results generated from DESeq and SAM methods. The EIV regression model reveals both fixed and proportional biases between RNA-Seq and microarray. This may explain in part the lower cross-platform overlap in DEG lists compared to those in detectable genes.
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.