IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/sagmbi/v6y2007i1n32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Arm-Wise False Discovery Rate in Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Gaile Daniel P

    (State University of New York at Buffalo)

  • Schifano Elizabeth D

    (Cornell University)

  • Miecznikowski Jeffrey C

    (State University of New York at Buffalo)

  • Java James J

    (State University of New York at Buffalo)

  • Conroy Jeffrey M

    (Roswell Park Cancer Institute)

  • Nowak Norma J

    (New York State Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life Sciences)

Abstract

Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) is an array-based technology which provides simultaneous spot assays of relative genetic abundance (RGA) levels at multiple sites across the genome. These spot assays are spatially correlated with respect to genomic location and, as a result, the univariate tests conducted using data generated from these spot assays are also spatially correlated. In the context of multiple hypothesis testing, this spatial correlation complicates the question of how best to define a `discovery' and consequently, how best to estimate the false discovery rate (FDR) corresponding to a given rejection region.One can quantify the number of discoveries as the total number of spots for which the spot-based univariate test statistic falls within a given rejection region. Under this spot-based method, separate but correlated discoveries are identified. We show via a simulation study that the method of Benjamini and Hochberg (1995) can provide a reasonable estimate of the spot-wise FDR, but these results require that the simulated spot assays are categorized as true or false discoveries in a particular way. However, laboratory researchers may actually be interested in estimating a `regional' FDR, rather than a `local' spot-wise FDR. We describe an example of such circumstances, and present a method for estimating the (chromosome) arm-wise False Discovery Rate. In this framework, one can quantify the number of discoveries as the total number of chromosome arms for which at least one spot-based test statistic falls into a given rejection region. Defining the discoveries in this way, both the biological and testing objectives coincide. We provide results from a series of simulations which involved the analysis of preferentially re-sampled spot assay values from a real aCGH dataset.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaile Daniel P & Schifano Elizabeth D & Miecznikowski Jeffrey C & Java James J & Conroy Jeffrey M & Nowak Norma J, 2007. "Estimating the Arm-Wise False Discovery Rate in Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Experiments," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-24, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:sagmbi:v:6:y:2007:i:1:n:32
    DOI: 10.2202/1544-6115.1236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1544-6115.1236
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1544-6115.1236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:sagmbi:v:6:y:2007:i:1:n:32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.