MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark.
MicroRNA arrays possess a number of unique data features that challenge the assumption key to many normalization methods. We assessed the performance of existing normalization methods using two microRNA array datasets derived from the same set of tumor samples: one dataset was generated using a bloc...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2014-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4048305?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-3aedfbfcd9d9462f92923ebdb547e8ad |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-3aedfbfcd9d9462f92923ebdb547e8ad2020-11-25T00:27:01ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0196e9887910.1371/journal.pone.0098879MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark.Li-Xuan QinQin ZhouMicroRNA arrays possess a number of unique data features that challenge the assumption key to many normalization methods. We assessed the performance of existing normalization methods using two microRNA array datasets derived from the same set of tumor samples: one dataset was generated using a blocked randomization design when assigning arrays to samples and hence was free of confounding array effects; the second dataset was generated without blocking or randomization and exhibited array effects. The randomized dataset was assessed for differential expression between two tumor groups and treated as the benchmark. The non-randomized dataset was assessed for differential expression after normalization and compared against the benchmark. Normalization improved the true positive rate significantly in the non-randomized data but still possessed a false discovery rate as high as 50%. Adding a batch adjustment step before normalization further reduced the number of false positive markers while maintaining a similar number of true positive markers, which resulted in a false discovery rate of 32% to 48%, depending on the specific normalization method. We concluded the paper with some insights on possible causes of false discoveries to shed light on how to improve normalization for microRNA arrays.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4048305?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Li-Xuan Qin Qin Zhou |
spellingShingle |
Li-Xuan Qin Qin Zhou MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Li-Xuan Qin Qin Zhou |
author_sort |
Li-Xuan Qin |
title |
MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
title_short |
MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
title_full |
MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
title_fullStr |
MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
title_full_unstemmed |
MicroRNA array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
title_sort |
microrna array normalization: an evaluation using a randomized dataset as the benchmark. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2014-01-01 |
description |
MicroRNA arrays possess a number of unique data features that challenge the assumption key to many normalization methods. We assessed the performance of existing normalization methods using two microRNA array datasets derived from the same set of tumor samples: one dataset was generated using a blocked randomization design when assigning arrays to samples and hence was free of confounding array effects; the second dataset was generated without blocking or randomization and exhibited array effects. The randomized dataset was assessed for differential expression between two tumor groups and treated as the benchmark. The non-randomized dataset was assessed for differential expression after normalization and compared against the benchmark. Normalization improved the true positive rate significantly in the non-randomized data but still possessed a false discovery rate as high as 50%. Adding a batch adjustment step before normalization further reduced the number of false positive markers while maintaining a similar number of true positive markers, which resulted in a false discovery rate of 32% to 48%, depending on the specific normalization method. We concluded the paper with some insights on possible causes of false discoveries to shed light on how to improve normalization for microRNA arrays. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4048305?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT lixuanqin micrornaarraynormalizationanevaluationusingarandomizeddatasetasthebenchmark AT qinzhou micrornaarraynormalizationanevaluationusingarandomizeddatasetasthebenchmark |
_version_ |
1725341528849645568 |