title: Bivariate microarray analysis: statistical interpretation of two-channel functional genomics data.
abstract: Conventional statistical methods for interpreting microarray data require large numbers of replicates in order to provide sufficient levels of sensitivity. We recently described a method for identifying differentially-expressed genes in one-channel microarray data 1. Based on the idea that the variance structure of microarray data can itself be a reliable measure of noise, this method allows statistically sound interpretation of as few as two replicates per treatment condition. Unlike the one-channel array, the two-channel platform simultaneously compares gene expression in two RNA samples. This leads to covariation of the measured signals. Hence, by accounting for covariation in the variance model, we can significantly increase the power of the statistical test. We believe that this approach has the potential to overcome limitations of existing methods. We present here a novel approach for the analysis of microarray data that involves modeling the variance structure of paired expression data in the context of a Bayesian framework. We also describe a novel statistical test that can be used to identify differentially-expressed genes. This method, bivariate microarray analysis (BMA), demonstrates dramatically improved sensitivity over existing approaches. We show that with only two array replicates, it is possible to detect gene expression changes that are at best detected with six array replicates by other methods. Further, we show that combining results from BMA with Gene Ontology annotation yields biologically significant results in a ligand-treated macrophage cell system.
authors.affiliation: Department of Bioengineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA, alhsiao@ucsd.edu.
authors.forename: Albert
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Hsiao
authors.forename: Shankar
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Subramaniam
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2004 Nov 22;20(17):3108-27
references.pmid: 15217816
references.citation: J Comput Biol. 2000;7(6):805-17
references.pmid: 11382363
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2004 Mar 22;20(5):660-7
references.pmid: 15033873
references.citation: Biostatistics. 2003 Apr;4(2):249-64
references.pmid: 12925520
references.citation: Nat Med. 2003 Aug;9(8):1039-46
references.pmid: 12872166
references.citation: Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003 Jun 6;305(3):649-55
references.pmid: 12763043
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2001 Jun;17(6):509-19
references.pmid: 11395427
references.citation: Infect Immun. 1985 Feb;47(2):496-501
references.pmid: 3881351
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Apr 24;98(9):5116-21
references.pmid: 11309499
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2002 Dec;18(12):1633-40
references.pmid: 12490448
references.citation: Curr Opin Immunol. 1999 Feb;11(1):19-22
references.pmid: 10047547
references.citation: J Comput Biol. 2001;8(6):557-69
references.pmid: 11747612
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jan 2;98(1):31-6
references.pmid: 11134512
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 2003 May 16;278(20):18063-8
references.pmid: 12621037
references.citation: Nat Genet. 1999 Jan;21(1 Suppl):33-7
references.pmid: 9915498