4.7 Article

CrossNorm: a novel normalization strategy for microarray data in cancers

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep18898

关键词

-

资金

  1. Chinese University of Hong Kong
  2. GRF Grant from Research Grants Council of Hong Kong SAR, China [414413]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31100901]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2013M531064, 2014T70363]
  5. Heilongjiang Postdoctoral Foundation [LBH-Z12171]
  6. Scientific Research Fund of Heilongjiang Provincial Education Department [12541426]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Normalization is essential to get rid of biases in microarray data for their accurate analysis. Existing normalization methods for microarray gene expression data commonly assume a similar global expression pattern among samples being studied. However, scenarios of global shifts in gene expressions are dominant in cancers, making the assumption invalid. To alleviate the problem, here we propose and develop a novel normalization strategy, Cross Normalization (CrossNorm), for microarray data with unbalanced transcript levels among samples. Conventional procedures, such as RMA and LOESS, arbitrarily flatten the difference between case and control groups leading to biased gene expression estimates. Noticeably, applying these methods under the strategy of CrossNorm, which makes use of the overall statistics of the original signals, the results showed significantly improved robustness and accuracy in estimating transcript level dynamics for a series of publicly available datasets, including titration experiment, simulated data, spike-in data and several real-life microarray datasets across various types of cancers. The results have important implications for the past and the future cancer studies based on microarray samples with non-negligible difference. Moreover, the strategy can also be applied to other sorts of high-throughput data as long as the experiments have global expression variations between conditions.

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

4.7
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