ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025
A shrinkage-based statistical method for testing group mean differences in quantitative bottom-up proteomics.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIn bottom-up proteomics using data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry (DIA-MS), quantitative measurements are obtained following multiple steps of protein fragmentation and ionization, which introduces cumulative errors and impairs the effectiveness of classical statistical methods. This study proposes an alternative statistical approach for testing group mean differences at the peptide level in quantitative bottom-up proteomics.
resultsWe present a novel probabilistic graphical model, that accounts for the non-normality of empirical distributions and the correlations between fragment ion quantities. Based on the model, we propose a new statistical method that improves upon the classical feature-based approach by incorporating distribution-free shrinkage estimation of covariance matrices and bootstrap-based estimation of degrees-of-freedom. Simulated experiments demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms the four most widely used classical methods in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy, particularly when the data distribution closely resembles real MS data, and under conditions of small sample sizes. Numerical analysis of real quantitative tandem mass spectrometry data reveals that the proposed method effectively identifies candidate peptides exhibiting changes in mean quantity following treatment with the kinase inhibitor Staurosporine.
conclusionsThe proposed statistical method offers an effective alternative to classical approaches for differential analysis of peptides in quantitative bottom-up proteomics using DIA-MS. The R software package MDstatsDIAMS is available at https://github.com/namgillee/MDstatsDIAMS .
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.