Quality Control and Robust Estimation for cDNA Microarrays With Replicates

Comparative performance of four single extreme outlier discordancy tests from Monte Carlo simulations

Using highly precise and accurate Monte Carlo simulations of 20,000,000 replications and 102 independent simulation experiments with extremely low simulation errors and total uncertainties, we evaluated the performance of four single outlier discordancy tests (Grubbs test N2, Dixon test N8, skewness test N14, and kurtosis test N15) for normal samples of sizes 5 to 20. Statistical contaminations of a single observation resulting from parameters called δ from ±0.1 up to ±20 for modeling the slippage of central tendency or ε from ±1.1 up to ±200 for slippage of dispersion, as well as no contamination (δ = 0 and ε = ±1), were simulated. Because of the use of precise and accurate random and normally distributed simulated data, very large replications, and a large number of independent experiments, this paper presents a novel approach for precise and accurate estimations of power functions of four popular discordancy tests and, therefore, should not be considered as a simple simulation exercise unrelated to probability and statistics. From both criteria of the Power of Test proposed by Hayes and Kinsella and the Test Performance Criterion of Barnett and Lewis, Dixon test N8 performs less well than the other three tests. The overall performance of these four tests could be summarized as N2≅N15 > N14 > N8.

Comparability and reproducibility of biomedical data

With the development of novel assay technologies, biomedical experiments and analyses have gone through substantial evolution. Today, a typical experiment can simultaneously measure hundreds to thousands of individual features (e.g. genes) in dozens of biological conditions, resulting in gigabytes of data that need to be processed and analyzed. Because of the multiple steps involved in the data generation and analysis and the lack of details provided, it can be difficult for independent researchers to try to reproduce a published study. With the recent outrage following the halt of a cancer clinical trial due to the lack of reproducibility of the published study, researchers are now facing heavy pressure to ensure that their results are reproducible. Despite the global demand, too many published studies remain non-reproducible mainly due to the lack of availability of experimental protocol, data and/or computer code. Scientific discovery is an iterative process, where a published study generates new knowledge and data, resulting in new follow-up studies or clinical trials based on these results. As such, it is important for the results of a study to be quickly confirmed or discarded to avoid wasting time and money on novel projects. The availability of high-quality, reproducible data will also lead to more powerful analyses (or meta-analyses) where multiple data sets are combined to generate new knowledge. In this article, we review some of the recent developments regarding biomedical reproducibility and comparability and discuss some of the areas where the overall field could be improved.

Exploiting blank spots for model-based background correction in discovering genes with DNA array data

Motivated by a real data set deriving from a study on the genetic determinants of the behavior of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) hosted in macrophage, we take advantage of the presence of control spots and illustrate modelling issues for background correction and the ensuing empirical findings resulting from a Bayesian hierarchical approach to the problem of detecting differentially expressed genes. We prove the usefulness of a fully integrated approach where background correction and normalization are embedded in a single model-based framework, creating a new tailored model to account for the peculiar features of DNA array data where null expressions are planned by design. We also advocate the use of an alternative normalization device resulting from a suitable reparameterization. The new model is validated by using both simulated and our MTB data. This work suggests that the presence of a substantial fraction of exact null expressions might be the effect of an imperfect background calibration and shows how this can be suitably re-calibrated with the information coming from control spots. The proposed idea can be extended to all experiments in which a subset of genes whose expression levels can be ascribed mainly to background noise is planned by design.