Literature DB >> 16551855

Reproducibility of gene expression signature-based predictions in replicate experiments.

Keith Anderson1, Kenneth R Hess, Mini Kapoor, Stephen Tirrell, Jean Courtemanche, Bailiang Wang, Yun Wu, Yun Gong, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, W Fraser Symmans, Lajos Pusztai.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The goals of this analysis were to (a) determine concordance of gene expression results from replicate experiments, (b) examine prediction agreement of multigene predictors on replicate data, and (c) assess the robustness of prediction results in the face of noise. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Affymetrix U133A gene chips were used for gene expression profiling of 97 fine-needle aspiration biopsies from breast cancer. Thirty-five cases were profiled in replicates: 17 within the same laboratory, 11 in two different laboratories, and 15 to assess manual and robotic labeling. We used data from 62 cases to develop 111 distinct pharmacogenomic predictors of response to therapy. These were tested on cases profiled in duplicates to determine prediction agreement and accuracy. To evaluate the robustness of the pharmacogenomic predictors, we also introduced random noise into the informative genes in one half of the replicates.
RESULTS: The average concordance correlation coefficient was 0.978 (range, 0.96-0.99) for intralaboratory replicates, 0.962 (range, 0.94-0.98) for between-laboratory replicates, and 0.971 (range, 0.93-0.99) for manual versus robotic labeling. The mean % prediction agreement on replicate data was 97% (95% CI, 0.96-0.98; SD, 0.006), 92% (95% CI, 0.90-0.93; SD, 0.009), and 94% (95% CI, 0.92-0.95; SD, 0.008) for support vector machines, diagonal linear discriminant analysis, and k-nearest neighbor prediction methods, respectively. Mean accuracy in the test set was 77% (95% CI, 0.74-0.79; SD, 0.014), 66% (95% CI, 0.63-0.73; SD, 0.015), and 64% (95% CI, 0.60-0.67; SD, 0.016), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Gene expression results obtained with Affymetrix U133A chips are highly reproducible within and across two high-volume laboratories. Pharmacogenomic predictions yielded >90% agreement in replicate data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16551855     DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1539

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  8 in total

1.  Intratumor heterogeneity and precision of microarray-based predictors of breast cancer biology and clinical outcome.

Authors:  William T Barry; Dawn N Kernagis; Holly K Dressman; Ryan J Griffis; J'vonne D Hunter; John A Olson; Jeff R Marks; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Paul K Marcom; Joseph R Nevins; Joseph Geradts; Michael B Datto
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-05       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Characterization of a genomic signature of pregnancy identified in the breast.

Authors:  Ilana Belitskaya-Lévy; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Jose Russo; Irma H Russo; Pal Bordás; Janet Ahman; Yelena Afanasyeva; Robert Johansson; Per Lenner; Xiaochun Li; Ricardo López de Cicco; Suraj Peri; Eric Ross; Patricia A Russo; Julia Santucci-Pereira; Fathima S Sheriff; Michael Slifker; Göran Hallmans; Paolo Toniolo; Alan A Arslan
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2011-05-27

3.  Gene expression, molecular class changes, and pathway analysis after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Takayuki Iwamoto; Shuying Liu; Huiqin Chen; Kim-Anh Do; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Gordon B Mills; Funda Meric-Bernstam; W Fraser Symmans; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  Heterogeneity of breast cancer among patients and implications for patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Fabrice Andre; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-08-12       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Prediction of the outcome of preoperative chemotherapy in breast cancer using DNA probes that provide information on both complete and incomplete responses.

Authors:  René Natowicz; Roberto Incitti; Euler Guimarães Horta; Benoît Charles; Philippe Guinot; Kai Yan; Charles Coutant; Fabrice Andre; Lajos Pusztai; Roman Rouzier
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Protein structure-based gene expression signatures.

Authors:  Rayees Rahman; Nicole Zatorski; Jens Hansen; Yuguang Xiong; J G Coen van Hasselt; Eric A Sobie; Marc R Birtwistle; Evren U Azeloglu; Ravi Iyengar; Avner Schlessinger
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Measures for the degree of overlap of gene signatures and applications to TCGA.

Authors:  Xingjie Shi; Huangdi Yi; Shuangge Ma
Journal:  Brief Bioinform       Date:  2014-12-31       Impact factor: 13.994

8.  How to get the most from microarray data: advice from reverse genomics.

Authors:  Ivan P Gorlov; Ji-Yeon Yang; Jinyoung Byun; Christopher Logothetis; Olga Y Gorlova; Kim-Anh Do; Christopher Amos
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.969

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.