| Literature DB >> 12734012 |
Andres Kriete1, Mary K Anderson, Brad Love, John Freund, James J Caffrey, M Brook Young, Timothy J Sendera, Scott R Magnuson, J Mark Braughler.
Abstract
We have developed a unique methodology for the combined analysis of histomorphometric and gene-expression profiles amenable to intensive data mining and multisample comparison for a comprehensive approach to toxicology. This hybrid technology, termed extensible morphometric relational gene-expression analysis (EMeRGE), is applied in a toxicological study of time-varied vehicle- and carbon-tetrachloride (CCl4)-treated rats, and demonstrates correlations between specific genes and tissue structures that can augment interpretation of biological observations and diagnosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2003 PMID: 12734012 PMCID: PMC156588 DOI: 10.1186/gb-2003-4-5-r32
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Figure 1Comparison of control and treated livers. Image montages based on image tiles of (a) control and (b) treated liver.
Figure 2Microscopic comparison of control and treated livers. Image tiles of (a) the control liver treated with corn oil and (b) a CCl4-treated liver analyzed by an automated microscope system. Identified structures including hepatocyte nuclei (blue), other nuclei (black), clear space (yellow) and vacuoles (green) are indicated by the overlay on the right side of each panel.
Number of genes correlated with tissue metrics at three levels ofconfidence ranked by the number of significant correlations for alpha = 0.01
| Rank | Tissue metric | Confidence level | ||
| 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.001 | ||
| 1 | % Clear space (non-stained tissue and cellular elements) | 241 | 74 | 10 |
| 2 | Area % vacuoles | 155 | 36 | 1 |
| 3 | Vacuoles/mm2 | 167 | 28 | 1 |
| 4 | % H&E stained elements | 106 | 19 | 0 |
| 5 | Area % sinusoids | 74 | 10 | 0 |
| 6 | Area % other nuclei | 51 | 7 | 0 |
| 7 | Hepatocyte nuclei/mm2 | 44 | 7 | 1 |
| 8 | Other nuclei/mm2 | 46 | 5 | 0 |
| 9 | Total nuclei/mm2 | 39 | 4 | 1 |
| 10 | Area % hepatocyte nuclei | 55 | 2 | 0 |
| 11 | Cytoplasmic texture | 19 | 2 | 0 |
| Expected false positives | 52 | 10 | 1 | |
| Number determined significant | 997 | 194 | 14 | |
For details see Additional data files.
Figure 3Principal component analysis. (a) First principal component versus the second principal component of the gene-expression data. The first principal component describes variance that tracks a single outlier rat in the control day-14 group. The second principal component captures the variance between the day-4 CCl4-treated group and the remaining animals. (b) First principal component versus the second principal component of the tissue data. The first principal component primarily captures the variability within the CCl4-treated day-4 group discretely from the other treatment or vehicle control groups. The second principal component describes variance between individual animals in all groups. (c) First principal component versus the second principal component of the combined data. Both the first and the second principal components capture the difference between the day-4 CCl4-treatment group and all other animals in the complete set. The treated day-7 and -14 animals completely overlap the control animals, demonstrating that the tissue appears to have returned to a nearly normal state.