Literature DB >> 16882647

Reliable gene signatures for microarray classification: assessment of stability and performance.

Chad A Davis1, Fabian Gerick, Volker Hintermair, Caroline C Friedel, Katrin Fundel, Robert Küffner, Ralf Zimmer.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: Two important questions for the analysis of gene expression measurements from different sample classes are (1) how to classify samples and (2) how to identify meaningful gene signatures (ranked gene lists) exhibiting the differences between classes and sample subsets. Solutions to both questions have immediate biological and biomedical applications. To achieve optimal classification performance, a suitable combination of classifier and gene selection method needs to be specifically selected for a given dataset. The selected gene signatures can be unstable and the resulting classification accuracy unreliable, particularly when considering different subsets of samples. Both unstable gene signatures and overestimated classification accuracy can impair biological conclusions.
METHODS: We address these two issues by repeatedly evaluating the classification performance of all models, i.e. pairwise combinations of various gene selection and classification methods, for random subsets of arrays (sampling). A model score is used to select the most appropriate model for the given dataset. Consensus gene signatures are constructed by extracting those genes frequently selected over many samplings. Sampling additionally permits measurement of the stability of the classification performance for each model, which serves as a measure of model reliability.
RESULTS: We analyzed a large gene expression dataset with 78 measurements of four different cartilage sample classes. Classifiers trained on subsets of measurements frequently produce models with highly variable performance. Our approach provides reliable classification performance estimates via sampling. In addition to reliable classification performance, we determined stable consensus signatures (i.e. gene lists) for sample classes. Manual literature screening showed that these genes are highly relevant to our gene expression experiment with osteoarthritic cartilage. We compared our approach to others based on a publicly available dataset on breast cancer. AVAILABILITY: R package at http://www.bio.ifi.lmu.de/~davis/edaprakt

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16882647     DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl400

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioinformatics        ISSN: 1367-4803            Impact factor:   6.937


  18 in total

1.  Measuring stability of feature selection in biomedical datasets.

Authors:  Jonathan L Lustgarten; Vanathi Gopalakrishnan; Shyam Visweswaran
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2009-11-14

Review 2.  In silico models of cancer.

Authors:  Lucas B Edelman; James A Eddy; Nathan D Price
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug

3.  A fuzzy gene expression-based computational approach improves breast cancer prognostication.

Authors:  Benjamin Haibe-Kains; Christine Desmedt; Françoise Rothé; Martine Piccart; Christos Sotiriou; Gianluca Bontempi
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 13.583

4.  Comparing the characteristics of gene expression profiles derived by univariate and multivariate classification methods.

Authors:  Manuela Zucknick; Sylvia Richardson; Euan A Stronach
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2008-02-23

5.  Advantages of genomic complexity: bioinformatics opportunities in microRNA cancer signatures.

Authors:  Yves A Lussier; Walter M Stadler; James L Chen
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Effect of size and heterogeneity of samples on biomarker discovery: synthetic and real data assessment.

Authors:  Barbara Di Camillo; Tiziana Sanavia; Matteo Martini; Giuseppe Jurman; Francesco Sambo; Annalisa Barla; Margherita Squillario; Cesare Furlanello; Gianna Toffolo; Claudio Cobelli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Core module biomarker identification with network exploration for breast cancer metastasis.

Authors:  Ruoting Yang; Bernie J Daigle; Linda R Petzold; Francis J Doyle
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Two-transcript gene expression classifiers in the diagnosis and prognosis of human diseases.

Authors:  Lucas B Edelman; Giuseppe Toia; Donald Geman; Wei Zhang; Nathan D Price
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 3.969

9.  Robust model selection for classification of microarrays.

Authors:  Ikumi Suzuki; Takashi Takenouchi; Miki Ohira; Shigeyuki Oba; Shin Ishii
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2009-06-25

10.  Gene expression profiling of breast cancer survivability by pooled cDNA microarray analysis using logistic regression, artificial neural networks and decision trees.

Authors:  Hsiu-Ling Chou; Chung-Tay Yao; Sui-Lun Su; Chia-Yi Lee; Kuang-Yu Hu; Harn-Jing Terng; Yun-Wen Shih; Yu-Tien Chang; Yu-Fen Lu; Chi-Wen Chang; Mark L Wahlqvist; Thomas Wetter; Chi-Ming Chu
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.