» Articles » PMID: 38463169

Comparison of RNA-Seq and Microarray in the Prediction of Protein Expression and Survival Prediction

Overview
Journal Front Genet
Date 2024 Mar 11
PMID 38463169
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Gene expression profiling using RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) and microarray technologies is widely used in cancer research to identify biomarkers for clinical endpoint prediction. We compared the performance of these two methods in predicting protein expression and clinical endpoints using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets of lung cancer, colorectal cancer, renal cancer, breast cancer, endometrial cancer, and ovarian cancer. We calculated the correlation coefficients between gene expression measured by RNA-seq or microarray and protein expression measured by reverse phase protein array (RPPA). In addition, after selecting the top 103 survival-related genes, we compared the random forest survival prediction model performance across test platforms and cancer types. Both RNA-seq and microarray data were retrieved from TCGA dataset. Most genes showed similar correlation coefficients between RNA-seq and microarray, but 16 genes exhibited significant differences between the two methods. The BAX gene was recurrently found in colorectal cancer, renal cancer, and ovarian cancer, and the PIK3CA gene belonged to renal cancer and breast cancer. Furthermore, the survival prediction model using microarray was better than the RNA-seq model in colorectal cancer, renal cancer, and lung cancer, but the RNA-seq model was better in ovarian and endometrial cancer. Our results showed good correlation between mRNA levels and protein measured by RPPA. While RNA-seq and microarray performance were similar, some genes showed differences, and further clinical significance should be evaluated. Additionally, our survival prediction model results were controversial.

Citing Articles

Exploring the effects of culture conditions on Yapsin () gene expression in .

Bednarek A, Kabut A, Rapala-Kozik M, Satala D Open Life Sci. 2024; 19(1):20220995.

PMID: 39655190 PMC: 11627043. DOI: 10.1515/biol-2022-0995.


Evolutionary Mechanism Based Conserved Gene Expression Biclustering Module Analysis for Breast Cancer Genomics.

Yuan W, Li Y, Han Z, Chen Y, Xie J, Chen J Biomedicines. 2024; 12(9).

PMID: 39335599 PMC: 11428256. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12092086.

References
1.
Zhang W, Yu Y, Hertwig F, Thierry-Mieg J, Zhang W, Thierry-Mieg D . Comparison of RNA-seq and microarray-based models for clinical endpoint prediction. Genome Biol. 2015; 16:133. PMC: 4506430. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-015-0694-1. View

2.
Sultan M, Schulz M, Richard H, Magen A, Klingenhoff A, Scherf M . A global view of gene activity and alternative splicing by deep sequencing of the human transcriptome. Science. 2008; 321(5891):956-60. DOI: 10.1126/science.1160342. View

3.
J van t Veer L, Dai H, van de Vijver M, He Y, Hart A, Mao M . Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002; 415(6871):530-6. DOI: 10.1038/415530a. View

4.
Djebali S, Davis C, Merkel A, Dobin A, Lassmann T, Mortazavi A . Landscape of transcription in human cells. Nature. 2012; 489(7414):101-8. PMC: 3684276. DOI: 10.1038/nature11233. View

5.
Kolesnikov N, Hastings E, Keays M, Melnichuk O, Tang Y, Williams E . ArrayExpress update--simplifying data submissions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014; 43(Database issue):D1113-6. PMC: 4383899. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gku1057. View