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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Teng, Mingxiang, Wang, Yadong, Kim, Seongho, Li, Lang, Shen, Changyu, Wang, Guohua, Liu, Yunlong, Huang, Tim H. M., Nephew, Kenneth P., Balch, Curt
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