Literature DB >> 26272994

Methods that remove batch effects while retaining group differences may lead to exaggerated confidence in downstream analyses.

Vegard Nygaard1, Einar Andreas Rødland1, Eivind Hovig2.   

Abstract

Removal of, or adjustment for, batch effects or center differences is generally required when such effects are present in data. In particular, when preparing microarray gene expression data from multiple cohorts, array platforms, or batches for later analyses, batch effects can have confounding effects, inducing spurious differences between study groups. Many methods and tools exist for removing batch effects from data. However, when study groups are not evenly distributed across batches, actual group differences may induce apparent batch differences, in which case batch adjustments may bias, usually deflate, group differences. Some tools therefore have the option of preserving the difference between study groups, e.g. using a two-way ANOVA model to simultaneously estimate both group and batch effects. Unfortunately, this approach may systematically induce incorrect group differences in downstream analyses when groups are distributed between the batches in an unbalanced manner. The scientific community seems to be largely unaware of how this approach may lead to false discoveries.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Batch effects; Data normalization; Microarrays; Reproducible research

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26272994      PMCID: PMC4679072          DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxv027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biostatistics        ISSN: 1465-4644            Impact factor:   5.899


  13 in total

1.  Normalization of cDNA microarray data.

Authors:  Gordon K Smyth; Terry Speed
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.608

2.  The sva package for removing batch effects and other unwanted variation in high-throughput experiments.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Leek; W Evan Johnson; Hilary S Parker; Andrew E Jaffe; John D Storey
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Linear models and empirical bayes methods for assessing differential expression in microarray experiments.

Authors:  Gordon K Smyth
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2004-02-12

4.  Adjusting batch effects in microarray expression data using empirical Bayes methods.

Authors:  W Evan Johnson; Cheng Li; Ariel Rabinovic
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2006-04-21       Impact factor: 5.899

Review 5.  Tackling the widespread and critical impact of batch effects in high-throughput data.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Leek; Robert B Scharpf; Héctor Corrada Bravo; David Simcha; Benjamin Langmead; W Evan Johnson; Donald Geman; Keith Baggerly; Rafael A Irizarry
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2010-09-14       Impact factor: 53.242

6.  A comparison of batch effect removal methods for enhancement of prediction performance using MAQC-II microarray gene expression data.

Authors:  J Luo; M Schumacher; A Scherer; D Sanoudou; D Megherbi; T Davison; T Shi; W Tong; L Shi; H Hong; C Zhao; F Elloumi; W Shi; R Thomas; S Lin; G Tillinghast; G Liu; Y Zhou; D Herman; Y Li; Y Deng; H Fang; P Bushel; M Woods; J Zhang
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.550

7.  Gene expression analysis reveals functional pathways of glatiramer acetate activation.

Authors:  Shlomo Bakshi; Vered Chalifa-Caspi; Inbar Plaschkes; Igor Perevozkin; Michael Gurevich; Riki Schwartz
Journal:  Expert Opin Ther Targets       Date:  2013-03-08       Impact factor: 6.902

8.  Batch correction of microarray data substantially improves the identification of genes differentially expressed in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Peter Kupfer; Reinhard Guthke; Dirk Pohlers; Rene Huber; Dirk Koczan; Raimund W Kinne
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 3.063

9.  Removing batch effects in analysis of expression microarray data: an evaluation of six batch adjustment methods.

Authors:  Chao Chen; Kay Grennan; Judith Badner; Dandan Zhang; Elliot Gershon; Li Jin; Chunyu Liu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Ten simple rules for reproducible computational research.

Authors:  Geir Kjetil Sandve; Anton Nekrutenko; James Taylor; Eivind Hovig
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  97 in total

1.  Rapid induction of the heat hardening response in an Arctic insect.

Authors:  Mathias Hamann Sørensen; Torsten Nygaard Kristensen; Jannik Mørk Skovgaard Lauritzen; Natasja Krog Noer; Toke Thomas Høye; Simon Bahrndorff
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  In Vitro Pluripotent Stem Cell Differentiation to Hepatocyte Ceases Further Maturation at an Equivalent Stage of E15 in Mouse Embryonic Liver Development.

Authors:  Ravali Raju; David Chau; Tineke Notelaers; Chad L Myers; Catherine M Verfaillie; Wei-Shou Hu
Journal:  Stem Cells Dev       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 3.272

3.  Harmonization of radiomic feature distributions: impact on classification of hepatic tissue in CT imaging.

Authors:  Hubert Beaumont; Antoine Iannessi; Anne-Sophie Bertrand; Jean Michel Cucchi; Olivier Lucidarme
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Biological Perspectives of RNA-Sequencing Experimental Design.

Authors:  Metsada Pasmanik-Chor
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

5.  Learning and Imputation for Mass-spec Bias Reduction (LIMBR).

Authors:  Alexander M Crowell; Casey S Greene; Jennifer J Loros; Jay C Dunlap
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Accumulating Transcriptome Drift Precedes Cell Aging in Human Umbilical Cord-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Serially Cultured to Replicative Senescence.

Authors:  Danielle M Wiese; Cindy C Ruttan; Catherine A Wood; Barry N Ford; Lorena R Braid
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 6.940

7.  Integrated Transcriptomic and Proteomic Analysis of Human Eccrine Sweat Glands Identifies Missing and Novel Proteins.

Authors:  Chan Hyun Na; Neeraj Sharma; Anil K Madugundu; Ruiqiang Chen; Melis Atalar Aksit; Gedge D Rosson; Garry R Cutting; Akhilesh Pandey
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 5.911

8.  Horizontal meta-analysis identifies common deregulated genes across AML subgroups providing a robust prognostic signature.

Authors:  Ali Nehme; Hassan Dakik; Frédéric Picou; Meyling Cheok; Claude Preudhomme; Hervé Dombret; Juliette Lambert; Emmanuel Gyan; Arnaud Pigneux; Christian Récher; Marie C Béné; Fabrice Gouilleux; Kazem Zibara; Olivier Herault; Frédéric Mazurier
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2020-10-27

9.  Cell Cycle M-Phase Genes Are Highly Upregulated in Anaplastic Thyroid Carcinoma.

Authors:  Paul Weinberger; Sithara Raju Ponny; Hongyan Xu; Shan Bai; Robert Smallridge; John Copland; Ashok Sharma
Journal:  Thyroid       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 6.568

10.  Meta-analysis of Transcriptomic Data Reveals Pathophysiological Modules Involved with Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Rodrigo Haas Bueno; Mariana Recamonde-Mendoza
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 4.074

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.