4.8 Article

Analysis of factorial time-course microarrays with application to a clinical study of burn injury

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1002757107

Keywords

factorial design; longitudinal data; analysis of variance

Funding

  1. NIH [U54 GM-062119, SHC 86400]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [U54GM062119] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Time-course microarray experiments are capable of capturing dynamic gene expression profiles. It is important to study how these dynamic profiles depend on the multiple factors that characterize the experimental condition under which the time course is observed. Analytic methods are needed to simultaneously handle the time course and factorial structure in the data. We developed a method to evaluate factor effects by pooling information across the time course while accounting for multiple testing and non-normality of the microarray data. The method effectively extracts gene-specific response features and models their dependency on the experimental factors. Both longitudinal and cross-sectional time-course data can be handled by our approach. The method was used to analyze the impact of age on the temporal gene response to burn injury in a large-scale clinical study. Our analysis reveals that 21% of the genes responsive to burn are age-specific, among which expressions of mitochondria and immunoglobulin genes are differentially perturbed in pediatric and adult patients by burn injury. These new findings in the body's response to burn injury between children and adults support further investigations of therapeutic options targeting specific age groups. The methodology proposed here has been implemented in R package TANOVA and submitted to the Comprehensive R Archive Network at http://www.r-project.org/. It is also available for download at http://gluegrant1.stanford.edu/TANOVA/.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available