A graph theoretic approach to testing associations between disparate sources of functional genomic data

The last few years have seen the advent of high-throughput technologies to analyze various properties of the transcriptome and proteome of several organisms. The congruency of these different data sources, or lack thereof, can shed light on the mechanisms that govern cellular function. A central challenge for bioinformatics research is to develop a unified framework for combining the multiple sources of functional genomics information and testing associations between them, thus obtaining a robust and integrated view of the underlying biology. We present a graph theoretic approach to test the significance of the association between multiple disparate sources of functional genomics data by proposing two statistical tests, namely edge permutation and node label permutation tests. We demonstrate the use of the proposed tests by finding significant association between a Gene Ontology-derived "predictome" and data obtained from mRNA expression and phenotypic experiments for Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Moreover, we employ the graph theoretic framework to recast a surprising discrepancy presented in Giaever et al. (2002) between gene expression and knockout phenotype, using expression data from a different set of experiments.

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.