Cargando…
Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants
BACKGROUND: Combining the results of studies using highly parallelized measurements of gene expression such as microarrays and RNAseq offer unique challenges in meta analysis. Motivated by a need for a deeper understanding of organ transplant rejection, we combine the data from five separate studies...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2967747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21044364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-S9-S6 |
_version_ | 1782189701313069056 |
---|---|
author | Morgan, Alexander A Khatri, Purvesh Jones, Richard Hayden Sarwal, Minnie M Butte, Atul J |
author_facet | Morgan, Alexander A Khatri, Purvesh Jones, Richard Hayden Sarwal, Minnie M Butte, Atul J |
author_sort | Morgan, Alexander A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Combining the results of studies using highly parallelized measurements of gene expression such as microarrays and RNAseq offer unique challenges in meta analysis. Motivated by a need for a deeper understanding of organ transplant rejection, we combine the data from five separate studies to compare acute rejection versus stability after solid organ transplantation, and use this data to examine approaches to multiplex meta analysis. RESULTS: We demonstrate that a commonly used parametric effect size estimate approach and a commonly used non-parametric method give very different results in prioritizing genes. The parametric method providing a meta effect estimate was superior at ranking genes based on our gold-standard of identifying immune response genes in the transplant rejection datasets. CONCLUSION: Different methods of multiplex analysis can give substantially different results. The method which is best for any given application will likely depend on the particular domain, and it remains for future work to see if any one method is consistently better at identifying important biological signal across gene expression experiments. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2967747 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29677472010-11-03 Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants Morgan, Alexander A Khatri, Purvesh Jones, Richard Hayden Sarwal, Minnie M Butte, Atul J BMC Bioinformatics Proceedings BACKGROUND: Combining the results of studies using highly parallelized measurements of gene expression such as microarrays and RNAseq offer unique challenges in meta analysis. Motivated by a need for a deeper understanding of organ transplant rejection, we combine the data from five separate studies to compare acute rejection versus stability after solid organ transplantation, and use this data to examine approaches to multiplex meta analysis. RESULTS: We demonstrate that a commonly used parametric effect size estimate approach and a commonly used non-parametric method give very different results in prioritizing genes. The parametric method providing a meta effect estimate was superior at ranking genes based on our gold-standard of identifying immune response genes in the transplant rejection datasets. CONCLUSION: Different methods of multiplex analysis can give substantially different results. The method which is best for any given application will likely depend on the particular domain, and it remains for future work to see if any one method is consistently better at identifying important biological signal across gene expression experiments. BioMed Central 2010-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC2967747/ /pubmed/21044364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-S9-S6 Text en Copyright ©2010 Morgan 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 | Proceedings Morgan, Alexander A Khatri, Purvesh Jones, Richard Hayden Sarwal, Minnie M Butte, Atul J Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title | Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title_full | Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title_fullStr | Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title_short | Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
title_sort | comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants |
topic | Proceedings |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2967747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21044364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-S9-S6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT morganalexandera comparisonofmultiplexmetaanalysistechniquesforunderstandingtheacuterejectionofsolidorgantransplants AT khatripurvesh comparisonofmultiplexmetaanalysistechniquesforunderstandingtheacuterejectionofsolidorgantransplants AT jonesrichardhayden comparisonofmultiplexmetaanalysistechniquesforunderstandingtheacuterejectionofsolidorgantransplants AT sarwalminniem comparisonofmultiplexmetaanalysistechniquesforunderstandingtheacuterejectionofsolidorgantransplants AT butteatulj comparisonofmultiplexmetaanalysistechniquesforunderstandingtheacuterejectionofsolidorgantransplants |