ArticlePloS one2022
A robust biostatistical method leverages informative but uncertainly determined qPCR data for biomarker detection, early diagnosis, and treatment.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a common medium-throughput technique, qPCR (quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction) is widely used to measure levels of nucleic acids. In addition to accurate and complete data, experimenters have unavoidably observed some incomplete and uncertainly determined qPCR data because of intrinsically low overall amounts of biological materials, such as nucleic acids present in biofluids. When there are samples with uncertainly determined qPCR data, some investigators apply the statistical complete-case method by excluding the subset of samples with uncertainly determined data from analysis (CO), while others simply choose not to analyze (CNA) these datasets altogether. To include as many observations as possible in analysis for interesting differential changes between groups, some investigators set incomplete observations equal to the maximum quality qPCR cycle (MC), such as 32 and 40. Although straightforward, these methods may decrease the sample size, skew the data distribution, and compromise statistical power and research reproducibility across replicate qPCR studies. To overcome the shortcomings of the existing, commonly-used qPCR data analysis methods and to join the efforts in advancing statistical analysis in rigorous preclinical research, we propose a robust nonparametric statistical cycle-to-threshold method (CTOT) to analyze incomplete qPCR data for two-group comparisons. CTOT incorporates important characteristics of qPCR data and time-to-event statistical methodology, resulting in a novel analytical method for qPCR data that is built around good quality data from all subjects, certainly determined or not. Considering the benchmark full data (BFD), we compared the abilities of CTOT, CO, MC, and CNA statistical methods to detect interesting differential changes between groups with informative but uncertainly determined qPCR data. Our simulations and applications show that CTOT improves the power of detecting and confirming differential changes in many situations over the three commonly used methods without excess type I errors. The robust nonparametric statistical method of CTOT helps leverage qPCR technology and increase the power to detect differential changes that may assist decision making with respect to biomarker detection and early diagnosis, with the goal of improving the management of patient healthcare.
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.