Comparison of Normalization Methods for Illumina BeadChip HumanHT-12 V3

Overview

Journal BMC Genomics

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Genetics

Date 2010 Jun 8

PMID 20525181

Citations 54

Authors

Ramona Schmid

Patrick Baum

Carina Ittrich

Katrin Fundel-Clemens

Wolfgang Huber

Benedikt Brors

Roland Eils

Andreas Weith

Detlev Mennerich

Karsten Quast

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Normalization of microarrays is a standard practice to account for and minimize effects which are not due to the controlled factors in an experiment. There is an overwhelming number of different methods that can be applied, none of which is ideally suited for all experimental designs. Thus, it is important to identify a normalization method appropriate for the experimental setup under consideration that is neither too negligent nor too stringent. Major aim is to derive optimal results from the underlying experiment. Comparisons of different normalization methods have already been conducted, none of which, to our knowledge, comparing more than a handful of methods.

Results: In the present study, 25 different ways of pre-processing Illumina Sentrix BeadChip array data are compared. Among others, methods provided by the BeadStudio software are taken into account. Looking at different statistical measures, we point out the ideal versus the actual observations. Additionally, we compare qRT-PCR measurements of transcripts from different ranges of expression intensities to the respective normalized values of the microarray data. Taking together all different kinds of measures, the ideal method for our dataset is identified.

Conclusions: Pre-processing of microarray gene expression experiments has been shown to influence further downstream analysis to a great extent and thus has to be carefully chosen based on the design of the experiment. This study provides a recommendation for deciding which normalization method is best suited for a particular experimental setup.

Citing Articles

Novel RNA biomarkers improve discrimination of children with tuberculosis disease from those with non-TB pneumonia after stimulation.

Vito O, Psarras S, Syggelou A, Wright V, Amanatidou V, Newton S Front Immunol. 2024; 15:1401647.

PMID: 39391304 PMC: 11464340. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1401647.

Analyzing the Impact of the Highest Expressed Epstein-Barr Virus-Encoded microRNAs on the Host Cell Transcriptome.

Hohmann T, Hohmann U, Dehghani F, Grisk O, Jasinski-Bergner S Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(14).

PMID: 39063079 PMC: 11276978. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25147838.

Transcriptional markers classifying Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus induced sepsis in adults: A data-driven approach.

Irani Shemirani M PLoS One. 2024; 19(7):e0305920.

PMID: 38968271 PMC: 11226107. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305920.

Comparison of global DNA methylation analysis by whole genome bisulfite sequencing and the Infinium Mouse Methylation BeadChip using fresh and fresh-frozen mouse epidermis.

Meyer O, Andersen M, Borsting C, Morling N, Wulf H, Philipsen P Epigenetics. 2022; 18(1):2144574.

PMID: 36373380 PMC: 9980693. DOI: 10.1080/15592294.2022.2144574.

EPIphany-A Platform for Analysis and Visualization of Peptide Immunoarray Data.

Parker Cates Z, Facciuolo A, Hogan D, Griebel P, Napper S, Kusalik A Front Bioinform. 2022; 1:694324.

PMID: 36303765 PMC: 9581008. DOI: 10.3389/fbinf.2021.694324.

References

Yang Y, Dudoit S, Luu P, Lin D, Peng V, Ngai J . Normalization for cDNA microarray data: a robust composite method addressing single and multiple slide systematic variation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002; 30(4):e15. PMC: 100354. DOI: 10.1093/nar/30.4.e15. View

Jiang N, Leach L, Hu X, Potokina E, Jia T, Druka A . Methods for evaluating gene expression from Affymetrix microarray datasets. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008; 9:284. PMC: 2442103. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-284. View

Schena M, Shalon D, Davis R, Brown P . Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray. Science. 1995; 270(5235):467-70. DOI: 10.1126/science.270.5235.467. View

Gentleman R, Carey V, Bates D, Bolstad B, Dettling M, Dudoit S . Bioconductor: open software development for computational biology and bioinformatics. Genome Biol. 2004; 5(10):R80. PMC: 545600. DOI: 10.1186/gb-2004-5-10-r80. View

Cope L, Irizarry R, Jaffee H, Wu Z, Speed T . A benchmark for Affymetrix GeneChip expression measures. Bioinformatics. 2004; 20(3):323-31. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg410. View

Schmidt D, Ernst J . A fluorometric assay for the quantification of RNA in solution with nanogram sensitivity. Anal Biochem. 1995; 232(1):144-6. DOI: 10.1006/abio.1995.0025. View

Cui X, Churchill G . Statistical tests for differential expression in cDNA microarray experiments. Genome Biol. 2003; 4(4):210. PMC: 154570. DOI: 10.1186/gb-2003-4-4-210. View

Dunning M, Barbosa-Morais N, Lynch A, Tavare S, Ritchie M . Statistical issues in the analysis of Illumina data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008; 9:85. PMC: 2291044. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-85. View

Kuhn K, Baker S, Chudin E, Lieu M, Oeser S, Bennett H . A novel, high-performance random array platform for quantitative gene expression profiling. Genome Res. 2004; 14(11):2347-56. PMC: 525694. DOI: 10.1101/gr.2739104. View

10.

Lin S, Du P, Huber W, Kibbe W . Model-based variance-stabilizing transformation for Illumina microarray data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36(2):e11. PMC: 2241869. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkm1075. View

11.

Lim W, Wang K, Lefebvre C, Califano A . Comparative analysis of microarray normalization procedures: effects on reverse engineering gene networks. Bioinformatics. 2007; 23(13):i282-8. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm201. View

12.

Ding L, Xie Y, Park S, Xiao G, Story M . Enhanced identification and biological validation of differential gene expression via Illumina whole-genome expression arrays through the use of the model-based background correction methodology. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36(10):e58. PMC: 2425463. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkn234. View

13.

Huber W, von Heydebreck A, Sultmann H, Poustka A, Vingron M . Variance stabilization applied to microarray data calibration and to the quantification of differential expression. Bioinformatics. 2002; 18 Suppl 1:S96-104. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/18.suppl_1.s96. View

14.

McCall M, Irizarry R . Consolidated strategy for the analysis of microarray spike-in data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36(17):e108. PMC: 2553586. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkn430. View

15.

Irizarry R, Hobbs B, Collin F, Beazer-Barclay Y, Antonellis K, Scherf U . Exploration, normalization, and summaries of high density oligonucleotide array probe level data. Biostatistics. 2003; 4(2):249-64. DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/4.2.249. View

16.

Gautier L, Cope L, Bolstad B, Irizarry R . affy--analysis of Affymetrix GeneChip data at the probe level. Bioinformatics. 2004; 20(3):307-15. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg405. View

17.

Wilder S, Kaisaki P, Argoud K, Salhan A, Ragoussis J, Bihoreau M . Comparative analysis of methods for gene transcription profiling data derived from different microarray technologies in rat and mouse models of diabetes. BMC Genomics. 2009; 10:63. PMC: 2652496. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-63. View

18.

Parkinson H, Kapushesky M, Kolesnikov N, Rustici G, Shojatalab M, Abeygunawardena N . ArrayExpress update--from an archive of functional genomics experiments to the atlas of gene expression. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 37(Database issue):D868-72. PMC: 2686529. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkn889. View

19.

Livak K, Schmittgen T . Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) Method. Methods. 2002; 25(4):402-8. DOI: 10.1006/meth.2001.1262. View

20.

Barnes M, Freudenberg J, Thompson S, Aronow B, Pavlidis P . Experimental comparison and cross-validation of the Affymetrix and Illumina gene expression analysis platforms. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005; 33(18):5914-23. PMC: 1258170. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gki890. View