IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v53y2009i5p1639-1649.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing design of two-stage experiments for transcriptional profiling

Author

Listed:
  • Steibel, Juan P.
  • Rosa, Guilherme J.M.
  • Tempelman, Robert J.

Abstract

Gene expression microarrays are powerful tools for simultaneously screening the transcriptional profile for thousands of genes across different treatments. Despite their continually improving sensitivity and dynamic range, microarrays are commonly regarded as a first screening step, with a level of precision often deemed unacceptable to use as a standalone technology. This limitation has prompted genomics researchers to validate a statistically significant subset of their microarray results using a second technique, typically quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). The problem of optimizing such two-stage transcriptional profiling experiments in order to maximize sensitivity, while controlling the false discovery rate (FDR), is addressed. This optimization is based on partitioning the set of available biological replicates into two groups, one for each of the microarray (Stage 1) and qRT-PCR (Stage 2) experiments. It is demonstrated how the significance level should be determined for Stage 2, after selecting a fixed percentage of the genes to validate from Stage 1, in order to maximize the sensitivity of detection of differentially expressed genes for a desired overall FDR. The results indicate that most of the available replicates (typically >60%) should be consumed in Stage 1. Even though the optimization scheme assumes independent genes and known variances, simulation results show that this approach is robust to moderate departures from those assumptions. A procedure to optimize a validation experiment, conditional upon an existing microarray assay that was not optimized for two-stage testing, is also introduced. The results indicate that generally liberal significance levels (i.e.,alpha>0.05) could be used for gene-specific Stage 2 tests in typical studies to properly control FDR.

Suggested Citation

  • Steibel, Juan P. & Rosa, Guilherme J.M. & Tempelman, Robert J., 2009. "Optimizing design of two-stage experiments for transcriptional profiling," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 1639-1649, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:1639-1649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(08)00197-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Hansong & Stram, Daniel O., 2006. "Optimal two-stage genome-wide association designs based on false discovery rate," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 457-465, November.
    2. Jaya M. Satagopan & E. S. Venkatraman & Colin B. Begg, 2004. "Two-Stage Designs for Gene–Disease Association Studies with Sample Size Constraints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 60(3), pages 589-597, September.
    3. John D. Storey, 2002. "A direct approach to false discovery rates," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 64(3), pages 479-498, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. T. Tony Cai & Wenguang Sun, 2017. "Optimal screening and discovery of sparse signals with applications to multistage high throughput studies," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(1), pages 197-223, January.
    2. József Bukszár & Edwin J. C. G. van den Oord, 2006. "Optimization of Two-Stage Genetic Designs Where Data Are Combined Using an Accurate and Efficient Approximation for Pearson's Statistic," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 1132-1137, December.
    3. Youngchao Ge & Sandrine Dudoit & Terence Speed, 2003. "Resampling-based multiple testing for microarray data analysis," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 12(1), pages 1-77, June.
    4. Bajgrowicz, Pierre & Scaillet, Olivier, 2012. "Technical trading revisited: False discoveries, persistence tests, and transaction costs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 473-491.
    5. Wen Shi & Xi Chen & Jennifer Shang, 2019. "An Efficient Morris Method-Based Framework for Simulation Factor Screening," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 745-770, October.
    6. Dørum Guro & Snipen Lars & Solheim Margrete & Saebo Solve, 2011. "Smoothing Gene Expression Data with Network Information Improves Consistency of Regulated Genes," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, August.
    7. Jianqing Fan & Xu Han, 2017. "Estimation of the false discovery proportion with unknown dependence," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(4), pages 1143-1164, September.
    8. Duncan C. Thomas, 2005. "Discussion on "Statistical Issues Arising in the Women's Health Initiative"," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 930-933, December.
    9. A Bottle & P Aylin, 2011. "Predicting the false alarm rate in multi-institution mortality monitoring," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1711-1718, September.
    10. Van Hanh Nguyen & Catherine Matias, 2014. "On Efficient Estimators of the Proportion of True Null Hypotheses in a Multiple Testing Setup," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1167-1194, December.
    11. Shigeyuki Matsui & Hisashi Noma, 2011. "Estimating Effect Sizes of Differentially Expressed Genes for Power and Sample-Size Assessments in Microarray Experiments," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 1225-1235, December.
    12. Lianming Wang & David B. Dunson, 2010. "Semiparametric Bayes Multiple Testing: Applications to Tumor Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 493-501, June.
    13. Ebrahimi, Nader, 2008. "Simultaneous control of false positives and false negatives in multiple hypotheses testing," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 437-450, March.
    14. B. Moerkerke & E. Goetghebeur & J. De Riek & I. Roldán‐Ruiz, 2006. "Significance and impotence: towards a balanced view of the null and the alternative hypotheses in marker selection for plant breeding," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(1), pages 61-79, January.
    15. Zaili Fang & Inyoung Kim & Jeesun Jung, 2018. "Semiparametric Kernel-Based Regression for Evaluating Interaction Between Pathway Effect and Covariate," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 23(1), pages 129-152, March.
    16. Mark Rempel, 2016. "Improving Overnight Loan Identification in Payments Systems," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 48(2-3), pages 549-564, March.
    17. Timothy B. Armstrong, 2014. "Adaptive Testing on a Regression Function at a Point," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1957R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Feb 2015.
    18. Nucera, Federico & Valente, Giorgio, 2013. "Carry trades and the performance of currency hedge funds," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 407-425.
    19. Nickole Moon & Christopher P. Morgan & Ruth Marx-Rattner & Alyssa Jeng & Rachel L. Johnson & Ijeoma Chikezie & Carmen Mannella & Mary D. Sammel & C. Neill Epperson & Tracy L. Bale, 2024. "Stress increases sperm respiration and motility in mice and men," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    20. Axel Gandy & Georg Hahn, 2016. "A Framework for Monte Carlo based Multiple Testing," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1046-1063, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:1639-1649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.