Literature DB >> 22975077

Evaluation of qPCR curve analysis methods for reliable biomarker discovery: bias, resolution, precision, and implications.

Jan M Ruijter1, Michael W Pfaffl, Sheng Zhao, Andrej N Spiess, Gregory Boggy, Jochen Blom, Robert G Rutledge, Davide Sisti, Antoon Lievens, Katleen De Preter, Stefaan Derveaux, Jan Hellemans, Jo Vandesompele.   

Abstract

RNA transcripts such as mRNA or microRNA are frequently used as biomarkers to determine disease state or response to therapy. Reverse transcription (RT) in combination with quantitative PCR (qPCR) has become the method of choice to quantify small amounts of such RNA molecules. In parallel with the democratization of RT-qPCR and its increasing use in biomedical research or biomarker discovery, we witnessed a growth in the number of gene expression data analysis methods. Most of these methods are based on the principle that the position of the amplification curve with respect to the cycle-axis is a measure for the initial target quantity: the later the curve, the lower the target quantity. However, most methods differ in the mathematical algorithms used to determine this position, as well as in the way the efficiency of the PCR reaction (the fold increase of product per cycle) is determined and applied in the calculations. Moreover, there is dispute about whether the PCR efficiency is constant or continuously decreasing. Together this has lead to the development of different methods to analyze amplification curves. In published comparisons of these methods, available algorithms were typically applied in a restricted or outdated way, which does not do them justice. Therefore, we aimed at development of a framework for robust and unbiased assessment of curve analysis performance whereby various publicly available curve analysis methods were thoroughly compared using a previously published large clinical data set (Vermeulen et al., 2009) [11]. The original developers of these methods applied their algorithms and are co-author on this study. We assessed the curve analysis methods' impact on transcriptional biomarker identification in terms of expression level, statistical significance, and patient-classification accuracy. The concentration series per gene, together with data sets from unpublished technical performance experiments, were analyzed in order to assess the algorithms' precision, bias, and resolution. While large differences exist between methods when considering the technical performance experiments, most methods perform relatively well on the biomarker data. The data and the analysis results per method are made available to serve as benchmark for further development and evaluation of qPCR curve analysis methods (http://qPCRDataMethods.hfrc.nl).
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22975077     DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2012.08.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods        ISSN: 1046-2023            Impact factor:   3.608


  83 in total

1.  Association of the gut microbiota mobilome with hospital location and birth weight in preterm infants.

Authors:  Anuradha Ravi; Eva Lena F Estensmo; Trine M L' Abée-Lund; Steven L Foley; Bernhard Allgaier; Camilia R Martin; Erika C Claud; Knut Rudi
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.756

2.  Directional X Chromosome Skewing of White Blood Cells from Subjects with Heterozygous Mosaicism for the Variant IRAK1 Haplotype.

Authors:  Patrick Morcillo; Yong Qin; Geber Peña; Anne C Mosenthal; David H Livingston; Zoltan Spolarics
Journal:  Inflammation       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.092

3.  Isolation and characterization of two O-methyltransferases involved in benzylisoquinoline alkaloid biosynthesis in sacred lotus (Nelumbo nucifera).

Authors:  Ivette M Menéndez-Perdomo; Peter J Facchini
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 5.157

4.  A Real-Time PCR Assay Based on 5.8S rRNA Gene (5.8S rDNA) for Rapid Detection of Candida from Whole Blood Samples.

Authors:  Yi Guo; Jing-Xian Yang; Guo-Wei Liang
Journal:  Mycopathologia       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 2.574

5.  The miR164-dependent regulatory pathway in developing maize seed.

Authors:  Lanjie Zheng; Xiangge Zhang; Haojun Zhang; Yong Gu; Xinrong Huang; Huanhuan Huang; Hanmei Liu; Junjie Zhang; Yufeng Hu; Yangping Li; Guowu Yu; Yinghong Liu; Shaneka S Lawson; Yubi Huang
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomics       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 3.291

6.  Coronary heart disease alters intercellular communication by modifying microparticle-mediated microRNA transport.

Authors:  Nnenna A Finn; Danny Eapen; Pankaj Manocha; Hatem Al Kassem; Bernard Lassegue; Nima Ghasemzadeh; Arshed Quyyumi; Charles D Searles
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 4.124

7.  Selective targeting of CREB-binding protein/β-catenin inhibits growth of and extracellular matrix remodelling by airway smooth muscle.

Authors:  Tim Koopmans; Stijn Crutzen; Mark H Menzen; Andrew J Halayko; Tillie-Louise Hackett; Darryl A Knight; Reinoud Gosens
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 8.739

8.  NEDD9 depletion destabilizes Aurora A kinase and heightens the efficacy of Aurora A inhibitors: implications for treatment of metastatic solid tumors.

Authors:  Ryan J Ice; Sarah L McLaughlin; Ryan H Livengood; Mark V Culp; Erik R Eddy; Alexey V Ivanov; Elena N Pugacheva
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  A heterogeneous population of nuclear-encoded mitochondrial mRNAs is present in the axons of primary sympathetic neurons.

Authors:  Armaz Aschrafi; Amar N Kar; Jenna R Gale; Abdel G Elkahloun; Jose Noberto S Vargas; Naomi Sales; Gabriel Wilson; Miranda Tompkins; Anthony E Gioio; Barry B Kaplan
Journal:  Mitochondrion       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 4.160

10.  Jejunal mucosa proteomics unravel metabolic adaptive processes to mild chronic heat stress in dairy cows.

Authors:  Franziska Koch; Dirk Albrecht; Solvig Görs; Björn Kuhla
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.