title: Filtering, FDR and power.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In high-dimensional data analysis such as differential gene expression analysis, people often use filtering methods like fold-change or variance filters in an attempt to reduce the multiple testing penalty and improve power. However, filtering may introduce a bias on the multiple testing correction. The precise amount of bias depends on many quantities, such as fraction of probes filtered out, filter statistic and test statistic used.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We show that a biased multiple testing correction results if non-differentially expressed probes are not filtered out with equal probability from the entire range of p-values. We illustrate our results using both a simulation study and an experimental dataset, where the FDR is shown to be biased mostly by filters that are associated with the hypothesis being tested, such as the fold change. Filters that induce little bias on the FDR yield less additional power of detecting differentially expressed genes. Finally, we propose a statistical test that can be used in practice to determine whether any chosen filter introduces bias on the FDR estimate used, given a general experimental setup.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Filtering out of probes must be used with care as it may bias the multiple testing correction. Researchers can use our test for FDR bias to guide their choice of filter and amount of filtering in practice.
authors.affiliation: Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, 1007 MB, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Maarten
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: van Iterson
authors.forename: Judith M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Boer
authors.forename: Renée X
authors.initials: RX
authors.lastname: Menezes
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D019295:Computational Biology / Q000379:methods*; D020869:Gene Expression Profiling / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D007938:Leukemia / Q000235:genetics
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Dec 08;10:402
references.pmid: 19995439
references.citation: Biom J. 2008 Oct;50(5):716-44
references.pmid: 18932138
references.citation: Nat Immunol. 2009 Jan;10(1):116-125
references.pmid: 19029902
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Jan 31;7:49
references.pmid: 16448562
references.citation: Lancet Oncol. 2009 Feb;10(2):125-34
references.pmid: 19138562
references.citation: J Comput Biol. 2005 May;12(4):482-95
references.pmid: 15882143
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Jan 08;10:11
references.pmid: 19133141
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2009 Mar 15;25(6):765-71
references.pmid: 19176553
references.citation: Biometrics. 2009 Mar;65(1):19-29
references.pmid: 18479479