Cargando…

Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury

BACKGROUND: Microarray technology is a powerful methodology for identifying differentially expressed genes. However, when thousands of genes in a microarray data set are evaluated simultaneously by fold changes and significance tests, the probability of detecting false positives rises sharply. In th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xiao, Yuanyuan, Segal, Mark R, Rabert, Douglas, Ahn, Andrew H, Anand, Praveen, Sangameswaran, Lakshmi, Hu, Donglei, Hunt, C Anthony
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2002
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12354329
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-3-28
_version_ 1782120450877292544
author Xiao, Yuanyuan
Segal, Mark R
Rabert, Douglas
Ahn, Andrew H
Anand, Praveen
Sangameswaran, Lakshmi
Hu, Donglei
Hunt, C Anthony
author_facet Xiao, Yuanyuan
Segal, Mark R
Rabert, Douglas
Ahn, Andrew H
Anand, Praveen
Sangameswaran, Lakshmi
Hu, Donglei
Hunt, C Anthony
author_sort Xiao, Yuanyuan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Microarray technology is a powerful methodology for identifying differentially expressed genes. However, when thousands of genes in a microarray data set are evaluated simultaneously by fold changes and significance tests, the probability of detecting false positives rises sharply. In this first microarray study of brachial plexus injury, we applied and compared the performance of two recently proposed algorithms for tackling this multiple testing problem, Significance Analysis of Microarrays (SAM) and Westfall and Young step down adjusted p values, as well as t-statistics and Welch statistics, in specifying differential gene expression under different biological states. RESULTS: Using SAM based on t statistics, we identified 73 significant genes, which fall into different functional categories, such as cytokines / neurotrophin, myelin function and signal transduction. Interestingly, all but one gene were down-regulated in the patients. Using Welch statistics in conjunction with SAM, we identified an additional set of up-regulated genes, several of which are engaged in transcription and translation regulation. In contrast, the Westfall and Young algorithm identified only one gene using a conventional significance level of 0.05. CONCLUSION: In coping with multiple testing problems, Family-wise type I error rate (FWER) and false discovery rate (FDR) are different expressions of Type I error rates. The Westfall and Young algorithm controls FWER. In the context of this microarray study, it is, seemingly, too conservative. In contrast, SAM, by controlling FDR, provides a promising alternative. In this instance, genes selected by SAM were shown to be biologically meaningful.
format Text
id pubmed-137578
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2002
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-1375782002-12-05 Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury Xiao, Yuanyuan Segal, Mark R Rabert, Douglas Ahn, Andrew H Anand, Praveen Sangameswaran, Lakshmi Hu, Donglei Hunt, C Anthony BMC Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: Microarray technology is a powerful methodology for identifying differentially expressed genes. However, when thousands of genes in a microarray data set are evaluated simultaneously by fold changes and significance tests, the probability of detecting false positives rises sharply. In this first microarray study of brachial plexus injury, we applied and compared the performance of two recently proposed algorithms for tackling this multiple testing problem, Significance Analysis of Microarrays (SAM) and Westfall and Young step down adjusted p values, as well as t-statistics and Welch statistics, in specifying differential gene expression under different biological states. RESULTS: Using SAM based on t statistics, we identified 73 significant genes, which fall into different functional categories, such as cytokines / neurotrophin, myelin function and signal transduction. Interestingly, all but one gene were down-regulated in the patients. Using Welch statistics in conjunction with SAM, we identified an additional set of up-regulated genes, several of which are engaged in transcription and translation regulation. In contrast, the Westfall and Young algorithm identified only one gene using a conventional significance level of 0.05. CONCLUSION: In coping with multiple testing problems, Family-wise type I error rate (FWER) and false discovery rate (FDR) are different expressions of Type I error rates. The Westfall and Young algorithm controls FWER. In the context of this microarray study, it is, seemingly, too conservative. In contrast, SAM, by controlling FDR, provides a promising alternative. In this instance, genes selected by SAM were shown to be biologically meaningful. BioMed Central 2002-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC137578/ /pubmed/12354329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-3-28 Text en Copyright © 2002 Xiao et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
spellingShingle Research Article
Xiao, Yuanyuan
Segal, Mark R
Rabert, Douglas
Ahn, Andrew H
Anand, Praveen
Sangameswaran, Lakshmi
Hu, Donglei
Hunt, C Anthony
Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title_full Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title_fullStr Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title_short Assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
title_sort assessment of differential gene expression in human peripheral nerve injury
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12354329
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-3-28
work_keys_str_mv AT xiaoyuanyuan assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT segalmarkr assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT rabertdouglas assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT ahnandrewh assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT anandpraveen assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT sangameswaranlakshmi assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT hudonglei assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury
AT huntcanthony assessmentofdifferentialgeneexpressioninhumanperipheralnerveinjury