Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26403471›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015

Systematic noise degrades gene co-expression signals but can be corrected.

Saskia Freytag, Johann Gagnon-Bartsch, Terence P Speed, Melanie Bahlo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Cleaning thePlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Transcriptomic context ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  20. 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.

Saskia FreytagBioinformatics Division, Walter + Eliza Hall Institute, 1G Royal Parade, Melbourne, 3050, Australia. freytag.s@wehi.edu.au.
Johann Gagnon-BartschDepartment of Statistics, University of California, 367 Evans Hall, Berkeley, 94720, USA. johann@berkeley.edu.
Terence P SpeedBioinformatics Division, Walter + Eliza Hall Institute, 1G Royal Parade, Melbourne, 3050, Australia. terry@wehi.edu.au.
Melanie BahloBioinformatics Division, Walter + Eliza Hall Institute, 1G Royal Parade, Melbourne, 3050, Australia. bahlo@wehi.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the past decade, the identification of gene co-expression has become a routine part of the analysis of high-dimensional microarray data. Gene co-expression, which is mostly detected via the Pearson correlation coefficient, has played an important role in the discovery of molecular pathways and networks. Unfortunately, the presence of systematic noise in high-dimensional microarray datasets corrupts estimates of gene co-expression. Removing systematic noise from microarray data is therefore crucial. Many cleaning approaches for microarray data exist, however these methods are aimed towards improving differential expression analysis and their performances have been primarily tested for this application. To our knowledge, the performances of these approaches have never been systematically compared in the context of gene co-expression estimation.

resultsUsing simulations we demonstrate that standard cleaning procedures, such as background correction and quantile normalization, fail to adequately remove systematic noise that affects gene co-expression and at times further degrade true gene co-expression. Instead we show that a global version of removal of unwanted variation (RUV), a data-driven approach, removes systematic noise but also allows the estimation of the true underlying gene-gene correlations. We compare the performance of all noise removal methods when applied to five large published datasets on gene expression in the human brain. RUV retrieves the highest gene co-expression values for sets of genes known to interact, but also provides the greatest consistency across all five datasets. We apply the method to prioritize epileptic encephalopathy candidate genes.

conclusionsOur work raises serious concerns about the quality of many published gene co-expression analyses. RUV provides an efficient and flexible way to remove systematic noise from high-dimensional microarray datasets when the objective is gene co-expression analysis. The RUV method as applicable in the context of gene-gene correlation estimation is available as a BioconductoR-package: RUVcorr.

Indexed as

BrainEpilepsyGene ExpressionHumansLinear ModelsOligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis

Identifiers

PMID26403471
PMCPMC4583191

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.