ArticleCancer informatics2016
Selecting Reliable mRNA Expression Measurements Across Platforms Improves Downstream Analysis.
Article in Cancer informatics, 2016. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
With increasing use of publicly available gene expression data sets, the quality of the expression data is a critical issue for downstream analysis, gene signature development, and cross-validation of data sets. Thus, identifying reliable expression measurements by leveraging multiple mRNA expression platforms is an important analytical task. In this study, we propose a statistical framework for selecting reliable measurements between platforms by modeling the correlations of mRNA expression levels using a beta-mixture model. The model-based selection provides an effective and objective way to separate good probes from probes with low quality, thereby improving the efficiency and accuracy of the analysis. The proposed method can be used to compare two microarray technologies or microarray and RNA sequencing measurements. We tested the approach in two matched profiling data sets, using microarray gene expression measurements from the same samples profiled on both Affymetrix and Illumina platforms. We also applied the algorithm to mRNA expression data to compare Affymetrix microarray data with RNA sequencing measurements. The algorithm successfully identified probes/genes with reliable measurements. Removing the unreliable measurements resulted in significant improvements for gene signature development and functional annotations.
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.