4.8 Article

NOREVA: normalization and evaluation of MS-based metabolomics data

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 45, Issue W1, Pages W162-W170

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx449

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Precision Medicine Project of the National Key Research and Development Plan of China [2016YFC0902200]
  2. Innovation Project on Industrial Generic Key Technologies of Chongqing [cstc2015zdcy-ztzx120003]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities [10611CD-JXZ238826, CDJZR14468801, CDJKXB14011, 2015CD-JXY]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Diverse forms of unwanted signal variations in mass spectrometry-based metabolomics data adversely affect the accuracies of metabolic profiling. A variety of normalization methods have been developed for addressing this problem. However, their performances vary greatly and depend heavily on the nature of the studied data. Moreover, given the complexity of the actual data, it is not feasible to assess the performance of methods by single criterion. We therefore developed NOREVA to enable performance evaluation of various normalization methods from multiple perspectives. NOREVA integrated five well-established criteria (each with a distinct underlying theory) to ensure more comprehensive evaluation than any single criterion. It provided the most complete set of the available normalization methods, with unique features of removing overall unwanted variations based on quality control metabolites and allowing quality control samples based correction sequentially followed by data normalization. The originality of NOREVA and the reliability of its algorithms were extensively validated by case studies on five benchmark datasets. In sum, NOREVA is distinguished for its capability of identifying the well performed normalization method by taking multiple criteria into consideration and can be an indispensable complement to other available tools. NOREVA can be freely accessed at http://server.idrb.cqu.edu.cn/noreva/.

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