Cargando…
Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization
BACKGROUND: With the development of DNA hybridization microarray technologies, nowadays it is possible to simultaneously assess the expression levels of thousands to tens of thousands of genes. Quantitative comparison of microarrays uncovers distinct patterns of gene expression, which define differe...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1636075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17059609 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-469 |
_version_ | 1782130731271585792 |
---|---|
author | Fujita, André Sato, João Ricardo Rodrigues, Leonardo de Oliveira Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo Sogayar, Mari Cleide |
author_facet | Fujita, André Sato, João Ricardo Rodrigues, Leonardo de Oliveira Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo Sogayar, Mari Cleide |
author_sort | Fujita, André |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: With the development of DNA hybridization microarray technologies, nowadays it is possible to simultaneously assess the expression levels of thousands to tens of thousands of genes. Quantitative comparison of microarrays uncovers distinct patterns of gene expression, which define different cellular phenotypes or cellular responses to drugs. Due to technical biases, normalization of the intensity levels is a pre-requisite to performing further statistical analyses. Therefore, choosing a suitable approach for normalization can be critical, deserving judicious consideration. RESULTS: Here, we considered three commonly used normalization approaches, namely: Loess, Splines and Wavelets, and two non-parametric regression methods, which have yet to be used for normalization, namely, the Kernel smoothing and Support Vector Regression. The results obtained were compared using artificial microarray data and benchmark studies. The results indicate that the Support Vector Regression is the most robust to outliers and that Kernel is the worst normalization technique, while no practical differences were observed between Loess, Splines and Wavelets. CONCLUSION: In face of our results, the Support Vector Regression is favored for microarray normalization due to its superiority when compared to the other methods for its robustness in estimating the normalization curve. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1636075 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-16360752006-11-15 Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization Fujita, André Sato, João Ricardo Rodrigues, Leonardo de Oliveira Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo Sogayar, Mari Cleide BMC Bioinformatics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: With the development of DNA hybridization microarray technologies, nowadays it is possible to simultaneously assess the expression levels of thousands to tens of thousands of genes. Quantitative comparison of microarrays uncovers distinct patterns of gene expression, which define different cellular phenotypes or cellular responses to drugs. Due to technical biases, normalization of the intensity levels is a pre-requisite to performing further statistical analyses. Therefore, choosing a suitable approach for normalization can be critical, deserving judicious consideration. RESULTS: Here, we considered three commonly used normalization approaches, namely: Loess, Splines and Wavelets, and two non-parametric regression methods, which have yet to be used for normalization, namely, the Kernel smoothing and Support Vector Regression. The results obtained were compared using artificial microarray data and benchmark studies. The results indicate that the Support Vector Regression is the most robust to outliers and that Kernel is the worst normalization technique, while no practical differences were observed between Loess, Splines and Wavelets. CONCLUSION: In face of our results, the Support Vector Regression is favored for microarray normalization due to its superiority when compared to the other methods for its robustness in estimating the normalization curve. BioMed Central 2006-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC1636075/ /pubmed/17059609 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-469 Text en Copyright © 2006 Fujita et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Article Fujita, André Sato, João Ricardo Rodrigues, Leonardo de Oliveira Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo Sogayar, Mari Cleide Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title | Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title_full | Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title_fullStr | Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title_short | Evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
title_sort | evaluating different methods of microarray data normalization |
topic | Methodology Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1636075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17059609 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-469 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fujitaandre evaluatingdifferentmethodsofmicroarraydatanormalization AT satojoaoricardo evaluatingdifferentmethodsofmicroarraydatanormalization AT rodriguesleonardodeoliveira evaluatingdifferentmethodsofmicroarraydatanormalization AT ferreiracarloseduardo evaluatingdifferentmethodsofmicroarraydatanormalization AT sogayarmaricleide evaluatingdifferentmethodsofmicroarraydatanormalization |