ArticleBMC genomics2024
Addressing statistical challenges in the analysis of proteomics data with extremely small sample size: a simulation study.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Potential drug targets for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the plasma proteome identified through Mendelian randomization.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Reproducibility Crossroads: Impact of Statistical Choices on Proteomics Functional Enrichment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Transitioning from Transcriptomics to Proteomics: Enhancing Mechanistic Accuracy in PBPK Modeling via Absolute Protein Abundances.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
- Research Progress in Multi-Omics Analysis of Dairy Products: Nutritional Quality, Safety Evaluation, and Health Functions.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Integration of blood protein-metabolic profiles via machine learning to enable the accurate early detection of non-small cell lung cancer.Respiratory research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOne of the most promising approaches for early and more precise disease prediction and diagnosis is through the inclusion of proteomics data augmented with clinical data. Clinical proteomics data is often characterized by its high dimensionality and extremely limited sample size, posing a significant challenge when employing machine learning techniques for extracting only the most relevant information. Although there is a wide array of statistical techniques and numerous analysis pipelines employed in proteomics data analysis, it is unclear which of these methods produce the most efficient, reproducible, and clinically meaningful results.
resultsIn this study, we compared 9 unique analysis schemes comprised of different machine learning and dimensionality reduction methods for the analysis of simulated proteomics data consisting of 1317 proteins measured in 26 subjects (i.e., 13 controls and 13 cases). In scenarios where the sample size is extremely small (i.e., n < 30), all schemes resulted in an exceptionally high level of performance metrics, indicating potential overfitting. While performance metrics did not exhibit significant differences across schemes, the set of proteins selected to be discriminatory between groups demonstrated a substantial level of heterogeneity. However, despite heterogeneity in the selected proteins, their biological pathways and genetic diseases exhibited similarities. A sensitivity analysis conducted using varying sample sizes indicated that the stability of a set of selected biomarkers improves with larger sample sizes within a scheme.
conclusionsWhen the aim of the study is to identify a statistical model that best distinguishes between cohort groups using proteomics data and to uncover the biological pathways and disorders common among the selected proteins, the majority of widely used analysis pipelines perform similarly. However, if the main objective is to pinpoint a set of selected proteins that wield significant influence in discriminating cohort groups and utilize them for subsequent investigations, meticulous consideration is necessary when opting for statistical models, due to the possibility of heterogeneity in the sets of selected proteins.
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.