Genes Selection Comparative Study in Microarray Data Analysis

被引:3
作者
Kaissi, Ouafae [1 ]
Nimpaye, Eric [2 ]
Singh, Tiratha Raj [3 ]
Vannier, Brigitte [4 ]
Ibrahimi, Azeddine [5 ]
Ghacham, Abdellatif Amrani [1 ]
Moussa, Ahmed [2 ]
机构
[1] Adbelmalek Essaadi Univ, LTI Lab, ENSA, Tangier, Morocco
[2] Abdelmalek Essaadi Univ, LabTIC Lab, ENSA, Tangier, Morocco
[3] Jaypee Univ Informat Technol, Dept Biotechnol & Bioinformat, Solan, HP, India
[4] Univ Poitiers, Res Grp 2RTC, Poitiers, France
[5] Mohammed V Suissi Univ, Med Biotechnol Lab, FMP, Rabat, Morocco
关键词
Microarray data; Gene selection; R/BioConductor; Bioinformatics Matlab Toolbox; Comparative Study;
D O I
10.6026/97320630091019
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
In response to the rapid development of DNA Microarray Technologies, many differentially expressed genes selection algorithms have been developed, and different comparison studies of these algorithms have been done. However, it is not clear how these methods compare with each other, especially when we used different developments tools. Here, we considered three commonly used differentially expressed genes selection approaches, namely: Fold Change, T-test and SAM, using Bioinformatics Matlab Toolbox and R/BioConductor. We used two datasets, issued from the affymetrix technology, to present results of used methods and software's in gene selection process. The results, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, indicate that the behavior of SAM is better compared to Fold Change and T-test using R/BioConductor. While, no practical differences were observed between the three gene selection methods when using Bioinformatics Matlab Toolbox. In face of our result, the ROC curve shows that: on the one hand R/BioConductor using SAM is favored for microarray selection compared to the other methods. And, on the other hand, results of the three studied gene selection methods using Bioinformatics Matlab Toolbox are still comparable for the two datasets used.
引用
收藏
页码:1019 / 1022
页数:4
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   A Bayesian framework for the analysis of microarray expression data: regularized t-test and statistical inferences of gene changes [J].
Baldi, P ;
Long, AD .
BIOINFORMATICS, 2001, 17 (06) :509-519
[2]   Controlling the false discovery rate in behavior genetics research [J].
Benjamini, Y ;
Drai, D ;
Elmer, G ;
Kafkafi, N ;
Golani, I .
BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH, 2001, 125 (1-2) :279-284
[3]  
Chen Y, 1997, J Biomed Opt, V2, P364, DOI 10.1117/12.281504
[4]   Preferred analysis methods for Affymetrix GeneChips revealed by a wholly defined control dataset [J].
Choe, SE ;
Boutros, M ;
Michelson, AM ;
Church, GM ;
Halfon, MS .
GENOME BIOLOGY, 2005, 6 (02)
[5]   Gene expression in histologically normal epithelium from breast cancer patients and from cancer-free prophylactic mastectomy patients shares a similar profile [J].
Graham, K. ;
de las Morenas, A. ;
Tripathi, A. ;
King, C. ;
Kavanah, M. ;
Mendez, J. ;
Stone, M. ;
Slama, J. ;
Miller, M. ;
Antoine, G. ;
Willers, H. ;
Sebastiani, P. ;
Rosenberg, C. L. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2010, 102 (08) :1284-1293
[6]   Testing for differentially-expressed genes by maximum-likelihood analysis of microarray data [J].
Ideker, T ;
Thorsson, V ;
Siegel, AF ;
Hood, LE .
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, 2000, 7 (06) :805-817
[7]   Summaries of affymetrix GeneChip probe level data [J].
Irizarry, RA ;
Bolstad, BM ;
Collin, F ;
Cope, LM ;
Hobbs, B ;
Speed, TP .
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH, 2003, 31 (04) :e15
[8]   Comparison and evaluation of methods for generating differentially expressed gene lists from microarray data [J].
Jeffery, Ian B. ;
Higgins, Desmond G. ;
Culhane, Aedin C. .
BMC BIOINFORMATICS, 2006, 7 (1)
[9]   On parametric empirical Bayes methods for comparing multiple groups using replicated gene expression profiles [J].
Kendziorski, CM ;
Newton, MA ;
Lan, H ;
Gould, MN .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2003, 22 (24) :3899-3914
[10]  
Kerr M K, 2001, Biostatistics, V2, P183, DOI 10.1093/biostatistics/2.2.183