* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Talk2.stat.methods
X-inactivation wikipedia , lookup
Vectors in gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics in learning and memory wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy of the human retina wikipedia , lookup
Metagenomics wikipedia , lookup
Essential gene wikipedia , lookup
Gene nomenclature wikipedia , lookup
Oncogenomics wikipedia , lookup
Pathogenomics wikipedia , lookup
Quantitative trait locus wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of neurodegenerative diseases wikipedia , lookup
Long non-coding RNA wikipedia , lookup
History of genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Polycomb Group Proteins and Cancer wikipedia , lookup
Gene desert wikipedia , lookup
Public health genomics wikipedia , lookup
Mir-92 microRNA precursor family wikipedia , lookup
Minimal genome wikipedia , lookup
Therapeutic gene modulation wikipedia , lookup
Biology and consumer behaviour wikipedia , lookup
Genome evolution wikipedia , lookup
Genomic imprinting wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of diabetes Type 2 wikipedia , lookup
Ridge (biology) wikipedia , lookup
Site-specific recombinase technology wikipedia , lookup
Genome (book) wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of human development wikipedia , lookup
Nutriepigenomics wikipedia , lookup
Microevolution wikipedia , lookup
Artificial gene synthesis wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression programming wikipedia , lookup
Analysis of gene expression data (Nominal explanatory variables) Shyamal D. Peddada Biostatistics Branch National Inst. Environmental Health Sciences (NIH) Research Triangle Park, NC Outline of the talk Two types of explanatory variables (“experimental conditions”) Some scientific questions of interest A brief discussion on false discovery rate (FDR) analysis Some existing statistical methods for analyzing microarray data Types of explanatory variables Types of explanatory variables (“experimental conditions”) Nominal variables: – No intrinsic order among the levels of the explanatory variable(s). – No loss of information if we permuted the labels of the conditions. E.g. Comparison of gene expression of samples from “normal” tissue with those from “tumor” tissue. Types of explanatory variables (“experimental conditions”) Ordinal/interval variables: – Levels of the explanatory variables are ordered. – E.g. Comparison of gene expression of samples from different stages of severity of lessions such as “normal”, “hyperplasia”, “adenoma” and “carcinoma”. (categorically ordered) Time-course/dose-response experiments. (numerically ordered) Focus of this talk: Nominal explanatory variables Types of microarray data Independent samples – E.g. comparison of gene expression of independent samples drawn from normal patients versus independent samples from tumor patients. Dependent samples – E.g. comparison of gene expression of samples drawn from normal tissues and tumor tissues from the same patient. Possible questions of interest Identify significant “up/down” regulated genes for a given “condition” relative to another “condition” (adjusted for other covariates). Identify genes that discriminate between various “conditions” and predict the “class/condition” of a future observation. Cluster genes according to patterns of expression over “conditions”. Other questions? Challenges Small sample size but a large number of genes. Multiple testing – Since each microarray has thousands of genes/probes, several thousand hypotheses are being tested. This impacts the overall Type I error rates. Complex dependence structure between genes and possibly among samples. – Difficult to model and/or account for the underlying dependence structures among genes. Multiple Testing: Type I Errors - False Discovery Rates … The Decision Table Number of Not rejected H0 Number of rejected H0 Number of True H0 The only observable values Number of True Total U V m0 T S m1 Ha Total W R m Strong and weak control of type I error rates Strong control: control type I error rate under any combination of true H and H 0 a Weak control: control type I error rate only when all null hypotheses are true Since we do not know a priori which hypotheses are true, we will focus on strong control of type I error rate. Consequences of multiple testing Suppose we test each hypothesis at 5% level of significance. – Suppose n = 10 independent tests performed. Then the probability of declaring at least 1 of the 10 tests significant is 1 – 0.9510 = 0.401. – If 50,000 independent tests are performed as in Affymetrix microarray data then you should expect 2500 false positives! Types of errors in the context of multiple testing Per-Family Error “Rate” (PFER): E(V ) – Expected number of false rejection of H 0 Per-Comparison Error Rate (PCER): E(V )/m – Expected proportion of false rejections of H 0 among all m hypotheses. Family-Wise Error Rate (FWER): P( V > 0 ) – Probability of at least one false rejection of H 0 among all m hypotheses Types of errors in the context of multiple testing False Discovery Rate (FDR): – Expected proportion of Type I errors among all rejected hypotheses. Benjamini-Hochberg (BH): Set V/R = 0 if R = 0. V V E ( 1{ R 0} ) E ( | R 0) P( R 0) R R Storey: Only interested in the case R > 0. (Positive FDR) pFDR E ( V V 1{ R 0} ) E ( | R 0) R R Some useful inequalities Since V R m, therefor e V V 1{ R 0} m R (1) Again, since V R and R 0 V 0 Therefore V 1{R 0} R 1{V 0}. V Thus 1{R 0} 1{V 0} . R Also 1{V 0} V (2) (3) Some useful inequalities Combining (1), (2) and (3), we have : V V 1{R 0} 1{V 0} V m R (4) Taking expectatio ns in (4) we have : V V E E 1{ R 0} E{1{V 0}} E{V } m R (5) Some useful inequalities Thus we have : PCER FDR FWER PFER Trivially FDR pFDR (6) (7) Conclusion It is conservative to control FWER rather than FDR! It is conservative to control pFDR rather than FDR! Some useful inequalities Question: Is pFDR FWER? Some useful inequalities Example : Suppose m0 m. Note : m0 m m1 0 S 0 V R V FDR E 1{ R 0} R E (1{V 0} ) P (V 0) FWER Some useful inequalities V But pFDR E | R 0 R E (1 | R 0) 1. Hence if m0 m then 1 pFDR FDR FWER Some useful inequalities However, in most applications such as microarrays, one expects m 0 1 In general, there is no proof of the statement pFDR FWER Some popular Type I error controlling procedures Let P(1) P( 2) ... P( m) denote the ordered p-values for the ‘m’ tests that are being performed. Let (1) ( 2) ... ( m) denote the ordered levels of significance used for testing the ‘m’ null hypotheses, H 0(1) , H 0( 2) ,..., H 0( m) respectively. Some popular controlling procedures Step-down procedure: Step 1 : If P(1) (1) then reject H 0(1) - Goto Step 2 Else Stop. Step 2 : If P( 2)H ,( 2H reject H 0( 2) - Goto Step 3 ) then ..., H (1) ( 2) (r ) Else Stop. Step 3 : If P(3) (3) then reject H 0(3) - Goto Step 3 Else Stop. and so on. Some popular controlling procedures Step –up procedure: Step 1 : If P( m) ( m) then reject H 0(i ) , i 1,2,...m and stop. Else goto Step 2. Step 2 : If P( m1) ( m1) then reject H 0(i ) , i 1,2,...m 1 and stop. Else goto Step 3. Step 3 : If P( m2) ( m2) then reject H 0(i ) , i 1,2,...m 2 and stop. Else goto Step 4. and so on! Some popular controlling procedures Single-step procedure A stepwise procedure with critical same critical constant for all ‘m’ hypotheses. (1) ( 2) ... ( m) Some typical stepwise procedures: FWER controlling procedures Bonferroni: A single-step procedure with Sidak: A single-step procedure with i 1 (1 )1/ m Holm: A step-down procedure with i /( m i 1) Hochberg: A step-up procedure with i /( m i 1) i /m minP method: A resampling-based single-step procedure with c where c be the α quantile of the distribution of i the minimum p-value. Comments on the methods Bonferroni: Very general but can be too conservative for large number of hypotheses. Sidak: More powerful than Bonferroni, but applicable when the test statistics are independent or have certain types of positive dependence. Comments on the methods Holm: More powerful than Bonferroni and is applicable for any type of dependence structure between test statistics. Hochberg: More powerful than Holm’s procedure but the test statistics should be either independent or the test statistic have a MTP2 property. Comments on the methods Multivariate Total Positivity of Order 2 (MTP2) f (x) is said to MTP2 if for all x,y R p , f (x y) f (x y) f (x) f (y) Some typical stepwise procedures: FDR controlling procedure Benjamini-Hochberg: A step-up procedure with i i / m An Illustration Lobenhofer et al. (2002) data: Expose breast cancer cells to estrodial for 1 hour or (12, 24 36 hours). Number of genes on the cDNA 2 spot array - 1900. Number of samples per time point 8., Compare 1 hour with (12, 24 and 36 hours) using a two-sided bootstrap t-test. Some Popular Methods of Analysis 1. Fold-change 1. Fold-change in gene expression For gene “g” compute the fold change between two conditions (e.g. treatment and control): X trt fg X cont 1. Fold-change in gene expression R1, R2 : pre-defined constants. f g R1 : gene “g” is “up-regulated”. f g R2 : gene “g” is “down-regulated”. 1. Fold-change in gene expression Strengths: – Simple to implement. – Biologists find it very easy to interpret. – It is widely used. Drawbacks: – Ignores variability in mean gene expression. – Genes with subtle gene expression values can be overlooked. i.e. potentially high false negative rates – Conversely, high false positive rates are also possible. 2. t-test type procedures 2.1 Permutation t-test For each gene “g” compute the standard two-sample t-statistic: X g ,trt X g ,cont tg 1 1 Sg ntrt ncont where X g ,trt , X g ,cont are the sample means and Sg is the pooled sample standard deviation. 2.1 Permutation t-test Statistical significance of a gene is determined by computing the null distribution of t g using either permutation or bootstrap procedure. 2.1 Permutation t-test Strengths: – – – Simple to implement. Biologists find it very easy to interpret. It is widely used. Drawback: – Potentially, for some genes the pooled sample standard deviation could be very small and hence it may result in inflated Type I errors and inflated false discovery rates. 2.2 SAM procedure (Significance Analysis of Microarrays) (Tusher et al., PNAS 2001) For each gene “g” modify the standard two-sample t-statistic as: dg X g ,trt X g ,cont s0 S g 1 1 ntrt ncont The “fudge” factor s0 is obtained such that the coefficient of variation in the above test statistic is minimized. 3. F-test and its variations for more than 2 nominal conditions Usual F-test and the P-values can be obtained by a suitable permutation procedure. Regularized F-test: Generalization of Baldi and Long methodology for multiple groups. – It better controls the false discovery rates and the powers comparable to the F-test. Cui and Churchill (2003) is a good review paper. 4. Linear fixed effects models Effects: – Array (A) - sample – Dye (D) – Variety (V) – test groups – Genes (G) – Expression (Y) 4. Linear fixed effects models (Kerr, Martin, and Churchill, 2000) Linear fixed effects model: log( Yijkg ) Ai D j Gg ( AD)ij ( AG)ig ( DG ) jg (VG) kg ijkg iid ijkg ~ N (0, ). 2 H 0 : (VG) kg 0 for all k 1,2,..., v 4. Linear fixed effects models All effects are assumed to be fixed effects. Main drawback – all genes have same variance! 5. Linear mixed effects models (Wolfinger et al. 2001) Stage 1 (Global normalization model) log( Ygij ) Ti A j (TA)ij gij Stage 2 (Gene specific model) ˆgij Gg (GT ) gi (GA) gj gij 5. Linear mixed effects models Assumptions: iid Ai ~ 2 N (0, ), iid (TA)ij ~ 2 N (0, TA ) iid ijkg ~ N (0, ), (GA) gj ~ 2 iid gij ~ 2 N (0, g ) 2 N (0, GAg ) 5. Linear mixed effects models (Wolfinger et al. 2001) Perform inferences on the interaction term (GT) gi A popular graphical representation: The Volcano Plots A scatter plot of log 10 ( p value) vs log 2 ( fold change) Genes with large fold change will lie outside a pair of vertical “threshold” lines. Further, genes which are highly significant with large fold change will lie either in the upper right hand or upper left hand corner. A useful review article Cui, X. and Churchill, G (2003), Genome Biology. Software: R package: statistics for microarray analysis. http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/users/terry/zarray/Software/smacode.html SAM: Significance Analysis of Microarray. http://www-stat.stanford.edu/%7Etibs/SAM Supervised classification algorithms Discriminant analysis based methods A. Linear and Quadratic Discriminant analysis based methods: Strength: – Well studied in the classical statistics literature Limitations: – Based on normality – Imposes constraints on the covariance matrices. Need to be concerned about the singularity issue. – No convenient strategy has been proposed in the literature to select “best” discrminating subset of genes. Discriminant analysis based methods B. Nonparametric classification using Genetic Algorithm and Knearest neighbors. – Li et al. (Bioinformatics, 2001) Strengths: – Entirely nonparametric – Takes into account the underlying dependence structure among genes – Does not require the estimation of a covariance matrix Weakness: – Computationally very intensive GA/KNN methodology – very brief description Computes the Euclidean distance between all pairs of samples based on a sub-vector on, say, 50 genes. Clusters each sample into a treatment group (i.e. condition) based on the K-Nearest Neighbors. Computes a fitness score for each subset of genes based on how many samples are correctly classified. This is the objective function. The objective function is optimized using Genetic Algorithm K-nearest neighbors classification (k=3) X Expression levels of gene 1 Subcategories within a class Expression levels of gene 1 Advantages of KNN approach Simple, performs as well as or better than more complex methods Free from assumptions such as normality of the distribution of expression levels Multivariate: takes account of dependence in expression levels Accommodates or even identifies distinct subtypes within a class Expression data: many genes and few samples There may be many subsets of genes that can statistically discriminate between the treated and untreated. There are too many possible subsets to look at. With 3,000 genes, there are about 1072 ways to make subsets of size 30. The genetic algorithm Computer algorithm (John Holland) that works by mimicking Darwin's natural selection Has been applied to many optimization problems ranging from engine design to protein folding and sequence alignment Effective in searching high dimensional space GA works by mimicking evolution Randomly select sets (“chromosomes”) of 30 genes from all the genes on the chip Evaluate the “fitness” of each “chromosome” – how well can it separate the treated from the untreated? Pass “chromosomes” randomly to next generation, with preference for the fittest Summary Pay attention to multiple testing problem. – Use FDR over FWER for large data sets such as gene expression microarrays Linear mixed effects models may be used for comparing expression data between groups. For classification problem, one may want to consider GA/KNN approach.