Literature DB >> 18338314

Practical guidelines for assessing power and false discovery rate for a fixed sample size in microarray experiments.

Tiejun Tong1, Hongyu Zhao.   

Abstract

One major goal in microarray studies is to identify genes having different expression levels across different classes/conditions. In order to achieve this goal, a study needs to have an adequate sample size to ensure the desired power. Owing to the importance of this topic, a number of approaches to sample size calculation have been developed. However, due to the cost and/or experimental difficulties in obtaining sufficient biological materials, it might be difficult to attain the required sample size. In this article, we address more practical questions for assessing power and false discovery rate (FDR) for a fixed sample size. The relationships between power, sample size and FDR are explored. We also conduct simulations and a real data study to evaluate the proposed findings. Copyright (c) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18338314      PMCID: PMC3157366          DOI: 10.1002/sim.3237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  17 in total

1.  Comparing three methods for variance estimation with duplicated high density oligonucleotide arrays.

Authors:  Xiaohong Huang; Wei Pan
Journal:  Funct Integr Genomics       Date:  2002-07-24       Impact factor: 3.410

2.  Controlling the proportion of false positives in multiple dependent tests.

Authors:  R L Fernando; D Nettleton; B R Southey; J C M Dekkers; M F Rothschild; M Soller
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Sample size for gene expression microarray experiments.

Authors:  Chen-An Tsai; Sue-Jane Wang; Dung-Tsa Chen; James J Chen
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-11-25       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Sample size determination in microarray experiments for class comparison and prognostic classification.

Authors:  Kevin Dobbin; Richard Simon
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  FDR-controlling testing procedures and sample size determination for microarrays.

Authors:  Shuying S Li; Jeannette Bigler; Johanna W Lampe; John D Potter; Ziding Feng
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Error-rate and decision-theoretic methods of multiple testing: which genes have high objective probabilities of differential expression?

Authors:  David R Bickel
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2004-05-19

7.  Practical FDR-based sample size calculations in microarray experiments.

Authors:  Jianhua Hu; Fei Zou; Fred A Wright
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-06-02       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  Approximate sample size calculations with microarray data: an illustration.

Authors:  José A Ferreira; Aeilko Zwinderman
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2006-10-09

9.  The behavior of the P-value when the alternative hypothesis is true.

Authors:  H M Hung; R T O'Neill; P Bauer; K Köhne
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Broad patterns of gene expression revealed by clustering analysis of tumor and normal colon tissues probed by oligonucleotide arrays.

Authors:  U Alon; N Barkai; D A Notterman; K Gish; S Ybarra; D Mack; A J Levine
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-06-08       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Systems vaccinology: its promise and challenge for HIV vaccine development.

Authors:  Helder I Nakaya; Bali Pulendran
Journal:  Curr Opin HIV AIDS       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.283

2.  Metabolomic analysis of the effects of chronic arsenic exposure in a mouse model of diet-induced Fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Xiang Zhang; Walter H Watson; Xue Shi; Xiaoli Wei; Imhoi Koo; Robin H Schmidt; Xinmin Yin; Seong Ho Kim; Andrew Vaughn; Craig J McClain; Gavin E Arteel
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 4.466

3.  Sample size considerations of prediction-validation methods in high-dimensional data for survival outcomes.

Authors:  Herbert Pang; Sin-Ho Jung
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 2.135

4.  Why is there a lack of consensus on molecular subgroups of glioblastoma? Understanding the nature of biological and statistical variability in glioblastoma expression data.

Authors:  Nicholas F Marko; John Quackenbush; Robert J Weil
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Gene expression in the Parkinson's disease brain.

Authors:  Patrick A Lewis; Mark R Cookson
Journal:  Brain Res Bull       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 4.077

6.  Small sample sizes in high-throughput miRNA screens: A common pitfall for the identification of miRNA biomarkers.

Authors:  M G M Kok; M W J de Ronde; P D Moerland; J M Ruijter; E E Creemers; S J Pinto-Sietsma
Journal:  Biomol Detect Quantif       Date:  2017-12-18

7.  Microbiome of Pacific Whiteleg shrimp reveals differential bacterial community composition between Wild, Aquacultured and AHPND/EMS outbreak conditions.

Authors:  Fernanda Cornejo-Granados; Alonso A Lopez-Zavala; Luigui Gallardo-Becerra; Alfredo Mendoza-Vargas; Filiberto Sánchez; Rodrigo Vichido; Luis G Brieba; Maria Teresa Viana; Rogerio R Sotelo-Mundo; Adrián Ochoa-Leyva
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Relative power and sample size analysis on gene expression profiling data.

Authors:  M van Iterson; P A C 't Hoen; P Pedotti; G J E J Hooiveld; J T den Dunnen; G J B van Ommen; J M Boer; R X Menezes
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 3.969

9.  SHRINE: enabling nationally scalable multi-site disease studies.

Authors:  Andrew J McMurry; Shawn N Murphy; Douglas MacFadden; Griffin Weber; William W Simons; John Orechia; Jonathan Bickel; Nich Wattanasin; Clint Gilbert; Philip Trevvett; Susanne Churchill; Isaac S Kohane
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Adaptive Evolution under Extreme Genetic Drift in Oxidatively Stressed Caenorhabditis elegans.

Authors:  Stephen F Christy; Riana I Wernick; Michael J Lue; Griselda Velasco; Dana K Howe; Dee R Denver; Suzanne Estes
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 3.416

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.