Cargando…
Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis
A number of empirical Bayes models (each with different statistical distribution assumptions) have now been developed to analyze differential DNA methylation using high-density oligonucleotide tiling arrays. However, it remains unclear which model performs best. For example, for analysis of differen...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3432337/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22956892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/376706 |
_version_ | 1782242193211129856 |
---|---|
author | Teng, Mingxiang Wang, Yadong Kim, Seongho Li, Lang Shen, Changyu Wang, Guohua Liu, Yunlong Huang, Tim H. M. Nephew, Kenneth P. Balch, Curt |
author_facet | Teng, Mingxiang Wang, Yadong Kim, Seongho Li, Lang Shen, Changyu Wang, Guohua Liu, Yunlong Huang, Tim H. M. Nephew, Kenneth P. Balch, Curt |
author_sort | Teng, Mingxiang |
collection | PubMed |
description | A number of empirical Bayes models (each with different statistical distribution assumptions) have now been developed to analyze differential DNA methylation using high-density oligonucleotide tiling arrays. However, it remains unclear which model performs best. For example, for analysis of differentially methylated regions for conservative and functional sequence characteristics (e.g., enrichment of transcription factor-binding sites (TFBSs)), the sensitivity of such analyses, using various empirical Bayes models, remains unclear. In this paper, five empirical Bayes models were constructed, based on either a gamma distribution or a log-normal distribution, for the identification of differential methylated loci and their cell division—(1, 3, and 5) and drug-treatment-(cisplatin) dependent methylation patterns. While differential methylation patterns generated by log-normal models were enriched with numerous TFBSs, we observed almost no TFBS-enriched sequences using gamma assumption models. Statistical and biological results suggest log-normal, rather than gamma, empirical Bayes model distribution to be a highly accurate and precise method for differential methylation microarray analysis. In addition, we presented one of the log-normal models for differential methylation analysis and tested its reproducibility by simulation study. We believe this research to be the first extensive comparison of statistical modeling for the analysis of differential DNA methylation, an important biological phenomenon that precisely regulates gene transcription. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3432337 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34323372012-09-06 Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis Teng, Mingxiang Wang, Yadong Kim, Seongho Li, Lang Shen, Changyu Wang, Guohua Liu, Yunlong Huang, Tim H. M. Nephew, Kenneth P. Balch, Curt Comp Funct Genomics Research Article A number of empirical Bayes models (each with different statistical distribution assumptions) have now been developed to analyze differential DNA methylation using high-density oligonucleotide tiling arrays. However, it remains unclear which model performs best. For example, for analysis of differentially methylated regions for conservative and functional sequence characteristics (e.g., enrichment of transcription factor-binding sites (TFBSs)), the sensitivity of such analyses, using various empirical Bayes models, remains unclear. In this paper, five empirical Bayes models were constructed, based on either a gamma distribution or a log-normal distribution, for the identification of differential methylated loci and their cell division—(1, 3, and 5) and drug-treatment-(cisplatin) dependent methylation patterns. While differential methylation patterns generated by log-normal models were enriched with numerous TFBSs, we observed almost no TFBS-enriched sequences using gamma assumption models. Statistical and biological results suggest log-normal, rather than gamma, empirical Bayes model distribution to be a highly accurate and precise method for differential methylation microarray analysis. In addition, we presented one of the log-normal models for differential methylation analysis and tested its reproducibility by simulation study. We believe this research to be the first extensive comparison of statistical modeling for the analysis of differential DNA methylation, an important biological phenomenon that precisely regulates gene transcription. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012 2012-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC3432337/ /pubmed/22956892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/376706 Text en Copyright © 2012 Mingxiang Teng et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Teng, Mingxiang Wang, Yadong Kim, Seongho Li, Lang Shen, Changyu Wang, Guohua Liu, Yunlong Huang, Tim H. M. Nephew, Kenneth P. Balch, Curt Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title | Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title_full | Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title_fullStr | Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title_short | Empirical Bayes Model Comparisons for Differential Methylation Analysis |
title_sort | empirical bayes model comparisons for differential methylation analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3432337/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22956892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/376706 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tengmingxiang empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT wangyadong empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT kimseongho empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT lilang empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT shenchangyu empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT wangguohua empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT liuyunlong empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT huangtimhm empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT nephewkennethp empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis AT balchcurt empiricalbayesmodelcomparisonsfordifferentialmethylationanalysis |