Cargando…
Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays
BACKGROUND: MiR arrays distinguish themselves from gene expression arrays by their more limited number of probes, and the shorter and less flexible sequence in probe design. Robust data processing and analysis methods tailored to the unique characteristics of miR arrays are greatly needed. Assumptio...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20663154 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-8-69 |
_version_ | 1782185067345346560 |
---|---|
author | Zhao, Yingdong Wang, Ena Liu, Hui Rotunno, Melissa Koshiol, Jill Marincola, Francesco M Landi, Maria Teresa McShane, Lisa M |
author_facet | Zhao, Yingdong Wang, Ena Liu, Hui Rotunno, Melissa Koshiol, Jill Marincola, Francesco M Landi, Maria Teresa McShane, Lisa M |
author_sort | Zhao, Yingdong |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: MiR arrays distinguish themselves from gene expression arrays by their more limited number of probes, and the shorter and less flexible sequence in probe design. Robust data processing and analysis methods tailored to the unique characteristics of miR arrays are greatly needed. Assumptions underlying commonly used normalization methods for gene expression microarrays containing tens of thousands or more probes may not hold for miR microarrays. Findings from previous studies have sometimes been inconclusive or contradictory. Further studies to determine optimal normalization methods for miR microarrays are needed. METHODS: We evaluated many different normalization methods for data generated with a custom-made two channel miR microarray using two data sets that have technical replicates from several different cell lines. The impact of each normalization method was examined on both within miR error variance (between replicate arrays) and between miR variance to determine which normalization methods minimized differences between replicate samples while preserving differences between biologically distinct miRs. RESULTS: Lowess normalization generally did not perform as well as the other methods, and quantile normalization based on an invariant set showed the best performance in many cases unless restricted to a very small invariant set. Global median and global mean methods performed reasonably well in both data sets and have the advantage of computational simplicity. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers need to consider carefully which assumptions underlying the different normalization methods appear most reasonable for their experimental setting and possibly consider more than one normalization approach to determine the sensitivity of their results to normalization method used. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2917409 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29174092010-08-07 Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays Zhao, Yingdong Wang, Ena Liu, Hui Rotunno, Melissa Koshiol, Jill Marincola, Francesco M Landi, Maria Teresa McShane, Lisa M J Transl Med Methodology BACKGROUND: MiR arrays distinguish themselves from gene expression arrays by their more limited number of probes, and the shorter and less flexible sequence in probe design. Robust data processing and analysis methods tailored to the unique characteristics of miR arrays are greatly needed. Assumptions underlying commonly used normalization methods for gene expression microarrays containing tens of thousands or more probes may not hold for miR microarrays. Findings from previous studies have sometimes been inconclusive or contradictory. Further studies to determine optimal normalization methods for miR microarrays are needed. METHODS: We evaluated many different normalization methods for data generated with a custom-made two channel miR microarray using two data sets that have technical replicates from several different cell lines. The impact of each normalization method was examined on both within miR error variance (between replicate arrays) and between miR variance to determine which normalization methods minimized differences between replicate samples while preserving differences between biologically distinct miRs. RESULTS: Lowess normalization generally did not perform as well as the other methods, and quantile normalization based on an invariant set showed the best performance in many cases unless restricted to a very small invariant set. Global median and global mean methods performed reasonably well in both data sets and have the advantage of computational simplicity. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers need to consider carefully which assumptions underlying the different normalization methods appear most reasonable for their experimental setting and possibly consider more than one normalization approach to determine the sensitivity of their results to normalization method used. BioMed Central 2010-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC2917409/ /pubmed/20663154 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-8-69 Text en Copyright ©2010 Zhao 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 Zhao, Yingdong Wang, Ena Liu, Hui Rotunno, Melissa Koshiol, Jill Marincola, Francesco M Landi, Maria Teresa McShane, Lisa M Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title | Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title_full | Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title_short | Evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microRNA microarrays |
title_sort | evaluation of normalization methods for two-channel microrna microarrays |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20663154 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-8-69 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhaoyingdong evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT wangena evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT liuhui evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT rotunnomelissa evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT koshioljill evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT marincolafrancescom evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT landimariateresa evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays AT mcshanelisam evaluationofnormalizationmethodsfortwochannelmicrornamicroarrays |