Evaluation of external RNA controls for the assessment of microarray performance

External RNA controls (ERCs), although important for microarray assay performance assessment, have yet to be fully implemented in the research community. As part of the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) study, two types of ERCs were implemented and evaluated; one was added to the total RNA in the samples before amplification and labeling; the other was added to the copyRNAs (cRNAs) before hybridization. ERC concentration-response curves were used across multiple commercial microarray platforms to identify problematic assays and potential sources of variation in the analytical process. In addition, the behavior of different ERC types was investigated, resulting in several important observations, such as the sample-dependent attributes of performance and the potential of using these control RNAs in a combinatorial fashion. This multiplatform investigation of the behavior and utility of ERCs provides a basis for articulating specific recommendations for their future use in evaluating assay performance across multiple platforms.     

Extended analysis of benchmark datasets for Agilent two-color microarrays

Background  

As part of its broad and ambitious mission, the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project reported the results of experiments using External RNA Controls (ERCs) on five microarray platforms. For most platforms, several different methods of data processing were considered. However, there was no similar consideration of different methods for processing the data from the Agilent two-color platform. While this omission is understandable given the scale of the project, it can create the false impression that there is consensus about the best way to process Agilent two-color data. It is also important to consider whether ERCs are representative of all the probes on a microarray.     

Reproducibility of microarray data: a further analysis of microarray quality control (MAQC) data

Background  

Many researchers are concerned with the comparability and reliability of microarray gene expression data. Recent completion of the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project provides a unique opportunity to assess reproducibility across multiple sites and the comparability across multiple platforms. The MAQC analysis presented for the conclusion of inter- and intra-platform comparability/reproducibility of microarray gene expression measurements is inadequate. We evaluate the reproducibility/comparability of the MAQC data for 12901 common genes in four titration samples generated from five high-density one-color microarray platforms and the TaqMan technology. We discuss some of the problems with the use of correlation coefficient as metric to evaluate the inter- and intra-platform reproducibility and the percent of overlapping genes (POG) as a measure for evaluation of a gene selection procedure by MAQC.     

Using RNA sample titrations to assess microarray platform performance and normalization techniques

We have assessed the utility of RNA titration samples for evaluating microarray platform performance and the impact of different normalization methods on the results obtained. As part of the MicroArray Quality Control project, we investigated the performance of five commercial microarray platforms using two independent RNA samples and two titration mixtures of these samples. Focusing on 12,091 genes common across all platforms, we determined the ability of each platform to detect the correct titration response across the samples. Global deviations from the response predicted by the titration ratios were observed. These differences could be explained by variations in relative amounts of messenger RNA as a fraction of total RNA between the two independent samples. Overall, both the qualitative and quantitative correspondence across platforms was high. In summary, titration samples may be regarded as a valuable tool, not only for assessing microarray platform performance and different analysis methods, but also for determining some underlying biological features of the samples.     

Evaluation of DNA microarray results with quantitative gene expression platforms

We have evaluated the performance characteristics of three quantitative gene expression technologies and correlated their expression measurements to those of five commercial microarray platforms, based on the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) data set. The limit of detection, assay range, precision, accuracy and fold-change correlations were assessed for 997 TaqMan Gene Expression Assays, 205 Standardized RT (Sta)RT-PCR assays and 244 QuantiGene assays. TaqMan is a registered trademark of Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. We observed high correlation between quantitative gene expression values and microarray platform results and found few discordant measurements among all platforms. The main cause of variability was differences in probe sequence and thus target location. A second source of variability was the limited and variable sensitivity of the different microarray platforms for detecting weakly expressed genes, which affected interplatform and intersite reproducibility of differentially expressed genes. From this analysis, we conclude that the MAQC microarray data set has been validated by alternative quantitative gene expression platforms thus supporting the use of microarray platforms for the quantitative characterization of gene expression.     

Performance comparison of one-color and two-color platforms within the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project

Microarray-based expression profiling experiments typically use either a one-color or a two-color design to measure mRNA abundance. The validity of each approach has been amply demonstrated. Here we provide a simultaneous comparison of results from one- and two-color labeling designs, using two independent RNA samples from the Microarray Quality Control (MAQC) project, tested on each of three different microarray platforms. The data were evaluated in terms of reproducibility, specificity, sensitivity and accuracy to determine if the two approaches provide comparable results. For each of the three microarray platforms tested, the results show good agreement with high correlation coefficients and high concordance of differentially expressed gene lists within each platform. Cumulatively, these comparisons indicate that data quality is essentially equivalent between the one- and two-color approaches and strongly suggest that this variable need not be a primary factor in decisions regarding experimental microarray design.     

The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements

Over the last decade, the introduction of microarray technology has had a profound impact on gene expression research. The publication of studies with dissimilar or altogether contradictory results, obtained using different microarray platforms to analyze identical RNA samples, has raised concerns about the reliability of this technology. The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project was initiated to address these concerns, as well as other performance and data analysis issues. Expression data on four titration pools from two distinct reference RNA samples were generated at multiple test sites using a variety of microarray-based and alternative technology platforms. Here we describe the experimental design and probe mapping efforts behind the MAQC project. We show intraplatform consistency across test sites as well as a high level of interplatform concordance in terms of genes identified as differentially expressed. This study provides a resource that represents an important first step toward establishing a framework for the use of microarrays in clinical and regulatory settings.     

Rat toxicogenomic study reveals analytical consistency across microarray platforms

To validate and extend the findings of the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project, a biologically relevant toxicogenomics data set was generated using 36 RNA samples from rats treated with three chemicals (aristolochic acid, riddelliine and comfrey) and each sample was hybridized to four microarray platforms. The MAQC project assessed concordance in intersite and cross-platform comparisons and the impact of gene selection methods on the reproducibility of profiling data in terms of differentially expressed genes using distinct reference RNA samples. The real-world toxicogenomic data set reported here showed high concordance in intersite and cross-platform comparisons. Further, gene lists generated by fold-change ranking were more reproducible than those obtained by t-test P value or Significance Analysis of Microarrays. Finally, gene lists generated by fold-change ranking with a nonstringent P-value cutoff showed increased consistency in Gene Ontology terms and pathways, and hence the biological impact of chemical exposure could be reliably deduced from all platforms analyzed.     

Assessing affymetrix GeneChip microarray quality

Background  

Microarray technology has become a widely used tool in the biological sciences. Over the past decade, the number of users has grown exponentially, and with the number of applications and secondary data analyses rapidly increasing, we expect this rate to continue. Various initiatives such as the External RNA Control Consortium (ERCC) and the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project have explored ways to provide standards for the technology. For microarrays to become generally accepted as a reliable technology, statistical methods for assessing quality will be an indispensable component; however, there remains a lack of consensus in both defining and measuring microarray quality.     

Transcriptional signatures of normal human mammary epithelial cells in response to benzo[a]pyrene exposure: a comparison of three microarray platforms

Microarrays are used to study gene expression in a variety of biological systems. A number of different platforms have been developed, but few studies exist that have directly compared the performance of one platform with another. The goal of this study was to determine array variation by analyzing the same RNA samples with three different array platforms. Using gene expression responses to benzo[a]pyrene exposure in normal human mammary epithelial cells (NHMECs), we compared the results of gene expression profiling using three microarray platforms: photolithographic oligonucleotide arrays (Affymetrix), spotted oligonucleotide arrays (Amersham), and spotted cDNA arrays (NCI). While most previous reports comparing microarrays have analyzed pre-existing data from different platforms, this comparison study used the same sample assayed on all three platforms, allowing for analysis of variation from each array platform. In general, poor correlation was found with corresponding measurements from each platform. Each platform yielded different gene expression profiles, suggesting that while microarray analysis is a useful discovery tool, further validation is needed to extrapolate results for broad use of the data. Also, microarray variability needs to be taken into consideration, not only in the data analysis but also in specific probe selection for each array type.     

Replication, Variation and Normalisation in Microarray Experiments

INTRODUCTION: Microarray experiments often have complex designs that include sample pooling, biological and technical replication, sample pairing and dye-swapping. This article demonstrates how statistical modelling can illuminate issues in the design and analysis of microarray experiments, and this information can then be used to plan effective studies. METHODS: A very detailed statistical model for microarray data is introduced, to show the possible sources of variation that are present in even the simplest microarray experiments. Based on this model, the efficacy of common experimental designs, normalisation methodologies and analyses is determined. RESULTS: When the cost of the arrays is high compared with the cost of samples, sample pooling and spot replication are shown to be efficient variance reduction methods, whereas technical replication of whole arrays is demonstrated to be very inefficient. Dye-swap designs can use biological replicates rather than technical replicates to improve efficiency and simplify analysis. When the cost of samples is high and technical variation is a major portion of the error, technical replication can be cost effective. Normalisation by centreing on a small number of spots may reduce array effects, but can introduce considerable variation in the results. Centreing using the bulk of spots on the array is less variable. Similarly, normalisation methods based on regression methods can introduce variability. Except for normalisation methods based on spiking controls, all normalisation requires that most genes do not differentially express. Methods based on spatial location and/or intensity also require that the nondifferentially expressing genes are at random with respect to location and intensity. Spotting designs should be carefully done so that spot replicates are widely spaced on the array, and genes with similar expression patterns are not clustered. DISCUSSION: The tools for statistical design of experiments can be applied to microarray experiments to improve both efficiency and validity of the studies. Given the high cost of microarray experiments, the benefits of statistical input prior to running the experiment cannot be over-emphasised.     

Three methods for optimization of cross-laboratory and cross-platform microarray expression data

Microarray gene expression data becomes more valuable as our confidence in the results grows. Guaranteeing data quality becomes increasingly important as microarrays are being used to diagnose and treat patients (1-4). The MAQC Quality Control Consortium, the FDA's Critical Path Initiative, NCI's caBIG and others are implementing procedures that will broadly enhance data quality. As GEO continues to grow, its usefulness is constrained by the level of correlation across experiments and general applicability. Although RNA preparation and array platform play important roles in data accuracy, pre-processing is a user-selected factor that has an enormous effect. Normalization of expression data is necessary, but the methods have specific and pronounced effects on precision, accuracy and historical correlation. As a case study, we present a microarray calibration process using normalization as the adjustable parameter. We examine the impact of eight normalizations across both Agilent and Affymetrix expression platforms on three expression readouts: (1) sensitivity and power, (2) functional/biological interpretation and (3) feature selection and classification error. The reader is encouraged to measure their own discordant data, whether cross-laboratory, cross-platform or across any other variance source, and to use their results to tune the adjustable parameters of their laboratory to ensure increased correlation.     

SWISS MADE: Standardized WithIn Class Sum of Squares to Evaluate Methodologies and Dataset Elements

Contemporary high dimensional biological assays, such as mRNA expression microarrays, regularly involve multiple data processing steps, such as experimental processing, computational processing, sample selection, or feature selection (i.e. gene selection), prior to deriving any biological conclusions. These steps can dramatically change the interpretation of an experiment. Evaluation of processing steps has received limited attention in the literature. It is not straightforward to evaluate different processing methods and investigators are often unsure of the best method. We present a simple statistical tool, Standardized WithIn class Sum of Squares (SWISS), that allows investigators to compare alternate data processing methods, such as different experimental methods, normalizations, or technologies, on a dataset in terms of how well they cluster a priori biological classes. SWISS uses Euclidean distance to determine which method does a better job of clustering the data elements based on a priori classifications. We apply SWISS to three different gene expression applications. The first application uses four different datasets to compare different experimental methods, normalizations, and gene sets. The second application, using data from the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project, compares different microarray platforms. The third application compares different technologies: a single Agilent two-color microarray versus one lane of RNA-Seq. These applications give an indication of the variety of problems that SWISS can be helpful in solving. The SWISS analysis of one-color versus two-color microarrays provides investigators who use two-color arrays the opportunity to review their results in light of a single-channel analysis, with all of the associated benefits offered by this design. Analysis of the MACQ data shows differential intersite reproducibility by array platform. SWISS also shows that one lane of RNA-Seq clusters data by biological phenotypes as well as a single Agilent two-color microarray.     

Intra-Platform Repeatability and Inter-Platform Comparability of MicroRNA Microarray Technology

Over the last decade, DNA microarray technology has provided a great contribution to the life sciences. The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project demonstrated the way to analyze the expression microarray. Recently, microarray technology has been utilized to analyze a comprehensive microRNA expression profiling. Currently, several platforms of microRNA microarray chips are commercially available. Thus, we compared repeatability and comparability of five different microRNA microarray platforms (Agilent, Ambion, Exiqon, Invitrogen and Toray) using 309 microRNAs probes, and the Taqman microRNA system using 142 microRNA probes. This study demonstrated that microRNA microarray has high intra-platform repeatability and comparability to quantitative RT-PCR of microRNA. Among the five platforms, Agilent and Toray array showed relatively better performances than the others. However, the current lineup of commercially available microRNA microarray systems fails to show good inter-platform concordance, probably because of lack of an adequate normalization method and severe divergence in stringency of detection call criteria between different platforms. This study provided the basic information about the performance and the problems specific to the current microRNA microarray systems.     

Analysis of variance components in gene expression data

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.     

Transformation of expression intensities across generations of Affymetrix microarrays using sequence matching and regression modeling

The utility of previously generated microarray data is severely limited owing to small study size, leading to under-powered analysis, and failure of replication. Multiplicity of platforms and various sources of systematic noise limit the ability to compile existing data from similar studies. We present a model for transformation of data across different generations of Affymetrix arrays, developed using previously published datasets describing technical replicates performed with two generations of arrays. The transformation is based upon a probe set-specific regression model, generated from replicate measurements across platforms, performed using correlation coefficients. The model, when applied to the expression intensities of 5069 shared, sequence-matched probe sets in three different generations of Affymetrix Human oligonucleotide arrays, showed significant improvement in inter generation correlations between sample-wide means and individual probe set pairs. The approach was further validated by an observed reduction in Euclidean distance between signal intensities across generations for the predicted values. Finally, application of the model to independent, but related datasets resulted in improved clustering of samples based upon their biological, as opposed to technical, attributes. Our results suggest that this transformation method is a valuable tool for integrating microarray datasets from different generations of arrays.     

Standardizing global gene expression analysis between laboratories and across platforms

To facilitate collaborative research efforts between multi-investigator teams using DNA microarrays, we identified sources of error and data variability between laboratories and across microarray platforms, and methods to accommodate this variability. RNA expression data were generated in seven laboratories, which compared two standard RNA samples using 12 microarray platforms. At least two standard microarray types (one spotted, one commercial) were used by all laboratories. Reproducibility for most platforms within any laboratory was typically good, but reproducibility between platforms and across laboratories was generally poor. Reproducibility between laboratories increased markedly when standardized protocols were implemented for RNA labeling, hybridization, microarray processing, data acquisition and data normalization. Reproducibility was highest when analysis was based on biological themes defined by enriched Gene Ontology (GO) categories. These findings indicate that microarray results can be comparable across multiple laboratories, especially when a common platform and set of procedures are used.