Search

Aims: Doxorubicin (DOX), a widely used anticancer agent, can cause an unpredictable cardiac toxicity which remains a major limitation in cancer chemotherapy. There is a need for noninvasive, sensitive and specific biomarkers which will allow identifying patients at risk for DOX-induced cardiotoxicity to prevent permanent cardiac damage. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the expression of specific genes in the peripheral blood can be used as surrogate marker(s) for DOX-induced cardiotoxicity., Methods/results: Rats were treated with a single dose of DOX similar to one single dose that is often administered in humans. The cardiac and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) genome-wide expression profiling were examined using Illumina microarrays. The results showed 4,409 differentially regulated genes (DRG) in the hearts and 4,120 DRG in PBMC. Of these 2411 genes were similarly DRG (SDRG) in both the heart and PBMC. Pathway analysis of the three datasets of DRG using Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis and Ingenuity Pathways Analysis (IPA) showed that most of the genes in these datasets fell into pathways related to oxidative stress response and protein ubiquination. IPA search for potential eligible biomarkers for cardiovascular disease within the SDRG list revealed 188 molecules., Conclusions: We report the first in-depth comparison of DOX-induced global gene expression profiles of hearts and PBMCs. The high similarity between the gene expression profiles of the heart and PBMC induced by DOX indicates that the PBMC transcriptome may serve as a surrogate marker of DOX-induced cardiotoxicity. Future directions of this research will include analysis of PBMC expression profiles of cancer patients treated with DOX-based chemotherapy to identify the cardiotoxicity risk, predict DOX-treatment response and ultimately to allow individualized anti-cancer therapy.

In studies that use DNA arrays to assess changes in gene expression, it is preferable to measure the significance of treatment effects on a group of genes from a pathway or functional category such as gene ontology terms (GO terms, http://www.geneontology.org) because this facilitates the interpretation of effects and may markedly increase significance. A modified meta-analysis method to combine p-values was developed to measure the significance of an overall treatment effect on such functionally-defined groups of genes, taking into account the correlation structure among genes. For hypothesis testing that allows gene expression to change in both directions, p-values are calculated under the null distribution generated by a Monte Carlo method. As a test of this procedure, we attempted to distinguish altered pathways in microarray studies performed with Mitochips, oligonucleotide microarrays specific to mitochondrial DNA-encoded transcripts. We found that our analytic method improves the specificity of selection for altered pathways, due to incorporation of the inter-gene correlation structure in each pathway. It is thus a practical method to measure treatment effects on GO groups. In many actual applications, microarray experiments measure treatment effects under complicated design structures and with small sample sizes. For such applications to real data of limited statistical power, and also in computer simulations, we demonstrate that our method gives reasonable test results.

Motivation: Gene class testing (GCT) is a statistical approach to determine whether some functionally predefined classes of genes express differently under two experimental conditions. GCT computes the P-value of each gene class based on the null distribution and the gene classes are ranked for importance in accordance with their P-values. Currently, two null hypotheses have been considered: the Q1 hypothesis tests the relative strength of association with the phenotypes among the gene classes, and the Q2 hypothesis assesses the statistical significance. These two hypotheses are related but not equivalent., Method: We investigate three one-sided and two two-sided test statistics under Q1 and Q2. The null distributions of gene classes under Q1 are generated by permuting gene labels and the null distributions under Q2 are generated by permuting samples., Results: We applied the five statistics to a diabetes dataset with 143 gene classes and to a breast cancer dataset with 508 GO (Gene Ontology) terms. In each statistic, the null distributions of the gene classes under Q1 are different from those under Q2 in both datasets, and their rankings can be different too. We clarify the one-sided and two-sided hypotheses, and discuss some issues regarding the Q1 and Q2 hypotheses for gene class ranking in the GCT. Because Q1 does not deal with correlations among genes, we prefer test based on Q2., Supplementary Information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Background: Gender differences in gene expression were estimated in liver samples from 9 males and 9 females. The study tested 31,110 genes for a gender difference using a design that adjusted for sources of variation associated with cDNA arrays, normalization, hybridizations and processing conditions., Results: The genes were split into 2,800 that were clearly expressed (expressed genes) and 28,310 that had expression levels in the background range (not expressed genes). The distribution of p-values from the 'not expressed' group was consistent with no gender differences. The distribution of p-values from the 'expressed' group suggested that 8% of these genes differed by gender, but the estimated fold-changes (expression in males/expression in females) were small. The largest observed fold-change was 1.55. The 95% confidence bounds on the estimated fold-changes were less than 1.4 fold for 79.3%, and few (1.1%) exceed 2-fold., Conclusion: Observed gender differences in gene expression were small. When selecting genes with gender differences based upon their p-values, false discovery rates exceed 80% for any set of genes, essentially making it impossible to identify any specific genes with a gender difference.

An objective of many functional genomics studies is to estimate treatment-induced changes in gene expression. cDNA arrays interrogate each tissue sample for the levels of mRNA for hundreds to tens of thousands of genes, and the use of this technology leads to a multitude of treatment contrasts. By-gene hypotheses tests evaluate the evidence supporting no effect, but selecting a significance level requires dealing with the multitude of comparisons. The p-values from these tests order the genes such that a p-value cutoff divides the genes into two sets. Ideally one set would contain the affected genes and the other would contain the unaffected genes. However, the set of genes selected as affected will have false positives, i.e., genes that are not affected by treatment. Likewise, the other set of genes, selected as unaffected, will contain false negatives, i.e., genes that are affected. A plot of the observed p-values (1 - p) versus their expectation under a uniform [0, 1] distribution allows one to estimate the number of true null hypotheses. With this estimate, the false positive rates and false negative rates associated with any p-value cutoff can be estimated. When computed for a range of cutoffs, these rates summarize the ability of the study to resolve effects. In our work, we are more interested in selecting most of the affected genes rather than protecting against a few false positives. An optimum cutoff, i.e., the best set given the data, depends upon the relative cost of falsely classifying a gene as affected versus the cost of falsely classifying a gene as unaffected. We select the cutoff by a decision-theoretic method analogous to methods developed for receiver operating characteristic curves. In addition, we estimate the false discovery rate and the false nondiscovery rate associated with any cutoff value. Two functional genomics studies that were designed to assess a treatment effect are used to illustrate how the methods allowed the investigators to determine a cutoff to suit their research goals.

Motivation: A microarray experiment is a multi-step process, and each step is a potential source of variation. There are two major sources of variation: biological variation and technical variation. This study presents a variance-components approach to investigating animal-to-animal, between-array, within-array and day-to-day variations for two data sets. The first data set involved estimation of technical variances for pooled control and pooled treated RNA samples. The variance components included between-array, and two nested within-array variances: between-section (the upper- and lower-sections of the array are replicates) and within-section (two adjacent spots of the same gene are printed within each section). The second experiment was conducted on four different weeks. Each week there were reference and test samples with a dye-flip replicate in two hybridization days. The variance components included week-to-week, animal-to-animal and between-array and within-array variances., Results: We applied the linear mixed-effects model to quantify different sources of variation. In the first data set, we found that the between-array variance is greater than the between-section variance, which, in turn, is greater than the within-section variance. In the second data set, for the reference samples, the week-to-week variance is larger than the between-array variance, which, in turn, is slightly larger than the within-array variance. For the test samples, the week-to-week variance has the largest variation. The animal-to-animal variance is slightly larger than the between-array and within-array variances. However, in a gene-by-gene analysis, the animal-to-animal variance is smaller than the between-array variance in four out of five housekeeping genes. In summary, the largest variation observed is the week-to-week effect. Another important source of variability is the animal-to-animal variation. Finally, we describe the use of variance-component estimates to determine optimal numbers of animals, arrays per animal and sections per array in planning microarray experiments.