4.6 Article

Importance of Correlation between Gene Expression Levels: Application to the Type I Interferon Signature in Rheumatoid Arthritis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 6, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024828

关键词

-

资金

  1. bioMerieux
  2. Hospices Civils de Lyon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The analysis of gene expression data shows that many genes display similarity in their expression profiles suggesting some co-regulation. Here, we investigated the co-expression patterns in gene expression data and proposed a correlation-based research method to stratify individuals. Methodology/Principal Findings: Using blood from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, we investigated the gene expression profiles from whole blood using Affymetrix microarray technology. Co-expressed genes were analyzed by a biclustering method, followed by gene ontology analysis of the relevant biclusters. Taking the type I interferon (IFN) pathway as an example, a classification algorithm was developed from the 102 RA patients and extended to 10 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients and 100 healthy volunteers to further characterize individuals. We developed a correlation-based algorithm referred to as Classification Algorithm Based on a Biological Signature (CABS), an alternative to other approaches focused specifically on the expression levels. This algorithm applied to the expression of 35 IFN-related genes showed that the IFN signature presented a heterogeneous expression between RA, SLE and healthy controls which could reflect the level of global IFN signature activation. Moreover, the monitoring of the IFN-related genes during the anti-TNF treatment identified changes in type I IFN gene activity induced in RA patients. Conclusions: In conclusion, we have proposed an original method to analyze genes sharing an expression pattern and a biological function showing that the activation levels of a biological signature could be characterized by its overall state of correlation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据