ArticleThe annals of applied statistics2020
FUNCTION-ON-SCALAR QUANTILE REGRESSION WITH APPLICATION TO MASS SPECTROMETRY PROTEOMICS DATA.
Article in The annals of applied statistics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional quantile principal component analysis.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- On function-on-function linear quantile regression.Journal of applied statistics · 2025Article
- Challenges and Opportunities for Bayesian Statistics in Proteomics.Journal of proteome research · 2022Review
- Bayesian variable selection in quantile regression with random effects: an application to Municipal Human Development Index.Journal of applied statistics · 2022Article
- FUNCTION-ON-SCALAR QUANTILE REGRESSION WITH APPLICATION TO MASS SPECTROMETRY PROTEOMICS DATA.The annals of applied statistics · 2020Article
- Quantile Function on Scalar Regression Analysis for Distributional Data.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mass spectrometry proteomics, characterized by spiky, spatially heterogeneous functional data, can be used to identify potential cancer biomarkers. Existing mass spectrometry analyses utilize mean regression to detect spectral regions that are differentially expressed across groups. However, given the inter-patient heterogeneity that is a key hallmark of cancer, many biomarkers are only present at aberrant levels for a subset of, not all, cancer samples. Differences in these biomarkers can easily be missed by mean regression, but might be more easily detected by quantile-based approaches. Thus, we propose a unified Bayesian framework to perform quantile regression on functional responses. Our approach utilizes an asymmetric Laplace working likelihood, represents the functional coefficients with basis representations which enable borrowing of strength from nearby locations, and places a global-local shrinkage prior on the basis coefficients to achieve adaptive regularization. Different types of basis transform and continuous shrinkage priors can be used in our framework. A scalable Gibbs sampler is developed to generate posterior samples that can be used to perform Bayesian estimation and inference while accounting for multiple testing. Our framework performs quantile regression and coefficient regularization in a unified manner, allowing them to inform each other and leading to improvement in performance over competing methods as demonstrated by simulation studies. We also introduce an adjustment procedure to the model to improve its frequentist properties of posterior inference. We apply our model to identify proteomic biomarkers of pancreatic cancer that are differentially expressed for a subset of cancer patients compared to the normal controls, which were missed by previous mean-regression based approaches. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
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.