title: A comparison of gene set analysis methods in terms of sensitivity, prioritization and specificity.
abstract: Identification of functional sets of genes associated with conditions of interest from omics data was first reported in 1999, and since, a plethora of enrichment methods were published for systematic analysis of gene sets collections including Gene Ontology and biological pathways. Despite their widespread usage in reducing the complexity of omics experiment results, their performance is poorly understood. Leveraging the existence of disease specific gene sets in KEGG and Metacore® databases, we compared the performance of sixteen methods under relaxed assumptions while using 42 real datasets (over 1,400 samples). Most of the methods ranked high the gene sets designed for specific diseases whenever samples from affected individuals were compared against controls via microarrays. The top methods for gene set prioritization were different from the top ones in terms of sensitivity, and four of the sixteen methods had large false positives rates assessed by permuting the phenotype of the samples. The best overall methods among those that generated reasonably low false positive rates, when permuting phenotypes, were PLAGE, GLOBALTEST, and PADOG. The best method in the category that generated higher than expected false positives was MRGSE.
authors.affiliation: Department of Computer Science, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States of America ; Perinatology Research Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development/National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, United States of America.
authors.forename: Adi L
authors.initials: AL
authors.lastname: Tarca
authors.forename: Gaurav
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Bhatti
authors.forename: Roberto
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Romero
mesh_terms: D030541:Databases, Genetic; D001330:Electronic Data Processing / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D020411:Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis / Q000379:methods*