Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32630764›Full record

ArticleMetabolites2020

Systematic Evaluation of Normalization Methods for Glycomics Data Based on Performance of Network Inference.

Elisa Benedetti, Nathalie Gerstner, Maja Pučić-Baković, Toma Keser, Karli R Reiding, L Renee Ruhaak, Tamara Štambuk, Maurice H J Selman, Igor Rudan, Ozren Polašek and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Metabolites, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. High-Throughput Glycomic Methods.Chemical reviews · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

17 authors.

Elisa BenedettiDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10022, USA.
Nathalie GerstnerInstitute of Computational Biology, Helmholtz Zentrum München-German Research Center for Environmental Health, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
Maja Pučić-BakovićGenos Glycoscience Research Laboratory, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.
Toma KeserFaculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.
Karli R ReidingBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Utrecht, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands.
L Renee RuhaakCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Tamara ŠtambukFaculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0003-3174-120X
Maurice H J SelmanBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Utrecht, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Igor RudanUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, EH8 9AG Edinburgh, UK.
Ozren PolašekMedical School, University of Split, 21000 Split, Croatia.
Caroline HaywardMedical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK.
Marian BeekmanSection of Molecular Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Eline SlagboomSection of Molecular Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Manfred WuhrerCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0814-4995
Malcolm G DunlopColon Cancer Genetics Group, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh and Medical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Edinburgh EH8 9YL, UK.
Gordan LaucGenos Glycoscience Research Laboratory, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.
Jan KrumsiekDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10022, USA.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 12076Cancer Research UK 18927Medical Research Council MC_PC_U127527198Medical Research Council MC_U127527198Medical Research Council MC_UU_00007/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00007/10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glycomics measurements, like all other high-throughput technologies, are subject to technical variation due to fluctuations in the experimental conditions. The removal of this non-biological signal from the data is referred to as normalization. Contrary to other omics data types, a systematic evaluation of normalization options for glycomics data has not been published so far. In this paper, we assess the quality of different normalization strategies for glycomics data with an innovative approach. It has been shown previously that Gaussian Graphical Models (GGMs) inferred from glycomics data are able to identify enzymatic steps in the glycan synthesis pathways in a data-driven fashion. Based on this finding, here, we quantify the quality of a given normalization method according to how well a GGM inferred from the respective normalized data reconstructs known synthesis reactions in the glycosylation pathway. The method therefore exploits a biological measure of goodness. We analyzed 23 different normalization combinations applied to six large-scale glycomics cohorts across three experimental platforms: Liquid Chromatography - ElectroSpray Ionization - Mass Spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS), Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography with Fluorescence Detection (UHPLC-FLD), and Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization - Furier Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance - Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-FTICR-MS). Based on our results, we recommend normalizing glycan data using the 'Probabilistic Quotient' method followed by log-transformation, irrespective of the measurement platform. This recommendation is further supported by an additional analysis, where we ranked normalization methods based on their statistical associations with age, a factor known to associate with glycomics measurements.

Indexed as

data normalizationgaussian graphical modelsglycomics

Identifiers

PMID32630764
PMCPMC7408386

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.