Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32598180›Full record

ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2020

Statistical Assessment of Depth Normalization for Small RNA Sequencing.

Li-Xuan Qin, Jian Zou, Jiejun Shi, Ann Lee, Aleksandra Mihailovic, Thalia A Farazi, Thomas Tuschl, Samuel Singer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors.

Li-Xuan QinDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Jian ZouDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Jiejun ShiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Ann LeeDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Aleksandra MihailovicLaboratory of RNA Molecular Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY.
Thalia A FaraziLaboratory of RNA Molecular Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY.
Thomas TuschlLaboratory of RNA Molecular Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY.
Samuel SingerDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Targeting Oncogenic Pathways in Genetically Complex SarcomasP50CA217694 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI Marc Ladanyi · 2018 to 2026
$21.5M
Statistical Evaluation and Selection of Normalization Methods for microRNA Sequencing Data in Cancer Biomarker StudiesR21CA214845 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI QIN, LI-XUAN · 2018 to 2019
$414k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P50 CA217694NCI NIH HHS R21 CA214845
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMethods for depth normalization have been assessed primarily with simulated data or cell-line-mixture data. There is a pressing need for benchmark data enabling a more realistic and objective assessment, especially in the context of small RNA sequencing.

methodsWe collected a unique pair of microRNA sequencing data sets for the same set of tumor samples; one data set was collected with and the other without uniform handling and balanced design. The former provided a benchmark for evaluating evidence of differential expression and the latter served as a test bed for normalization. Next, we developed a data perturbation algorithm to simulate additional data set pairs. Last, we assembled a set of computational tools to visualize and quantify the assessment.

resultsWe validated the quality of the benchmark data and showed the need for normalization of the test data. For illustration, we applied the data and tools to assess the performance of 9 existing normalization methods. Among them, trimmed mean of M-values was a better scaling method, whereas the median and the upper quartiles were consistently the worst performers; one variation of remove unwanted variation had the best chance of capturing true positives but at the cost of increased false positives. In general, these methods were, at best, moderately helpful when the level of differential expression was extensive and asymmetric.

conclusionOur study (1) provides the much-needed benchmark data and computational tools for assessing depth normalization, (2) shows the dependence of normalization performance on the underlying pattern of differential expression, and (3) calls for continued research efforts to develop more effective normalization methods.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBenchmarkingHumansSequence Analysis, RNA

Identifiers

PMID32598180
PMCPMC7330947

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.