An introduction to low-level analysis methods of DNA microarray data

This article gives an overview over the methods used in the low--level analysis of gene expression data generated using DNA microarrays. This type of experiment allows to determine relative levels of nucleic acid abundance in a set of tissues or cell populations for thousands of transcripts or loci simultaneously. Careful statistical design and analysis are essential to improve the efficiency and reliability of microarray experiments throughout the data acquisition and analysis process. This includes the design of probes, the experimental design, the image analysis of microarray scanned images, the normalization of fluorescence intensities, the assessment of the quality of microarray data and incorporation of quality information in subsequent analyses, the combination of information across arrays and across sets of experiments, the discovery and recognition of patterns in expression at the single gene and multiple gene levels, and the assessment of significance of these findings, considering the fact that there is a lot of noise and thus random features in the data. For all of these components, access to a flexible and efficient statistical computing environment is an essential aspect.

MULTIPLE MODEL EVALUATION ABSENT THE GOLD STANDARD VIA MODEL COMBINATION

We describe a method for evaluating an ensemble of predictive models given a sample of observations comprising the model predictions and the outcome event measured with error. Our formulation allows us to simultaneously estimate measurement error parameters, true outcome — aka the gold standard — and a relative weighting of the predictive scores. We describe conditions necessary to estimate the gold standard and for these estimates to be calibrated and detail how our approach is related to, but distinct from, standard model combination techniques. We apply our approach to data from a study to evaluate a collection of BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutation prediction scores. In this example, genotype is measured with error by one or more genetic assays. We estimate true genotype for each individual in the dataset, operating characteristics of the commonly used genotyping procedures and a relative weighting of the scores. Finally, we compare the scores against the gold standard genotype and find that Mendelian scores are, on average, the more refined and better calibrated of those considered and that the comparison is sensitive to measurement error in the gold standard.