» Articles » PMID: 17961233

Reproducibility of Microarray Data: a Further Analysis of Microarray Quality Control (MAQC) Data

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Biology
Date 2007 Oct 27
PMID 17961233
Citations 65
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Many researchers are concerned with the comparability and reliability of microarray gene expression data. Recent completion of the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project provides a unique opportunity to assess reproducibility across multiple sites and the comparability across multiple platforms. The MAQC analysis presented for the conclusion of inter- and intra-platform comparability/reproducibility of microarray gene expression measurements is inadequate. We evaluate the reproducibility/comparability of the MAQC data for 12901 common genes in four titration samples generated from five high-density one-color microarray platforms and the TaqMan technology. We discuss some of the problems with the use of correlation coefficient as metric to evaluate the inter- and intra-platform reproducibility and the percent of overlapping genes (POG) as a measure for evaluation of a gene selection procedure by MAQC.

Results: A total of 293 arrays were used in the intra- and inter-platform analysis. A hierarchical cluster analysis shows distinct differences in the measured intensities among the five platforms. A number of genes show a small fold-change in one platform and a large fold-change in another platform, even though the correlations between platforms are high. An analysis of variance shows thirty percent of gene expressions of the samples show inconsistent patterns across the five platforms. We illustrated that POG does not reflect the accuracy of a selected gene list. A non-overlapping gene can be truly differentially expressed with a stringent cut, and an overlapping gene can be non-differentially expressed with non-stringent cutoff. In addition, POG is an unusable selection criterion. POG can increase or decrease irregularly as cutoff changes; there is no criterion to determine a cutoff so that POG is optimized.

Conclusion: Using various statistical methods we demonstrate that there are differences in the intensities measured by different platforms and different sites within platform. Within each platform, the patterns of expression are generally consistent, but there is site-by-site variability. Evaluation of data analysis methods for use in regulatory decision should take no treatment effect into consideration, when there is no treatment effect, "a fold-change cutoff with a non-stringent p-value cutoff" could result in 100% false positive error selection.

Citing Articles

Multi-Omics Analysis Identified Drug Repurposing Targets for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Wang F, Barrero C Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(20).

PMID: 39456887 PMC: 11507528. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252011106.


A simplified machine learning model utilizing platelet-related genes for predicting poor prognosis in sepsis.

Diao Y, Zhao Y, Li X, Li B, Huo R, Han X Front Immunol. 2023; 14:1286203.

PMID: 38054005 PMC: 10694245. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1286203.


Uniformly shaped harmonization combines human transcriptomic data from different platforms while retaining their biological properties and differential gene expression patterns.

Borisov N, Tkachev V, Simonov A, Sorokin M, Kim E, Kuzmin D Front Mol Biosci. 2023; 10:1237129.

PMID: 37745690 PMC: 10511763. DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2023.1237129.


Multi-omics data integration using ratio-based quantitative profiling with Quartet reference materials.

Zheng Y, Liu Y, Yang J, Dong L, Zhang R, Tian S Nat Biotechnol. 2023; 42(7):1133-1149.

PMID: 37679543 PMC: 11252085. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-023-01934-1.


Towards reproducible research in recurrent pregnancy loss immunology: Learning from cancer microenvironment deconvolution.

Betti M, Vizza E, Piccione E, Pietropolli A, Chiofalo B, Pallocca M Front Immunol. 2023; 14:1082087.

PMID: 36911667 PMC: 9996132. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1082087.


References
1.
Ioannidis J . Microarrays and molecular research: noise discovery?. Lancet. 2005; 365(9458):454-5. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17878-7. View

2.
Larkin J, Frank B, Gavras H, Sultana R, Quackenbush J . Independence and reproducibility across microarray platforms. Nat Methods. 2005; 2(5):337-44. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth757. View

3.
Frantz S . An array of problems. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005; 4(5):362-3. DOI: 10.1038/nrd1746. View

4.
Marshall E . Getting the noise out of gene arrays. Science. 2004; 306(5696):630-1. DOI: 10.1126/science.306.5696.630. View

5.
Canales R, Luo Y, Willey J, Austermiller B, Barbacioru C, Boysen C . Evaluation of DNA microarray results with quantitative gene expression platforms. Nat Biotechnol. 2006; 24(9):1115-22. DOI: 10.1038/nbt1236. View