Biochip platforms as functional genomics tools for drug discovery

Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 347-354

  Wick, Ivan ^a   Hardiman, Gary ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Biochips; Data integration; Gene expression; Microarrays; Platform

Indexed keywords

COMPLEMENTARY DNA; NEW DRUG; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE;

AMPLICON; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DATA ANALYSIS; DNA LIBRARY; DNA MICROARRAY; DNA SEQUENCE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG RESEARCH; GENE FUNCTION; GENETIC DISORDER; HUMAN GENOME; MOLECULAR CLONING; PHARMACOGENOMICS; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; REVIEW; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM;

ANIMALS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DRUG DESIGN; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENOMICS; HUMANS; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

EID: 17844407926     PISSN: 13676733     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Kennedy T: Managing the drug discovery/development interface. Drug Disc Today (1997) 2(10):436-444.
2. Marton MJ, DeRiSi JL, Bennett HA, Iyer VR, Meyer MR, Roberts C, Stoughton R, Burchard J, Slade D, Dai H, Bassert DE Jr et al: Drug target validation and identification of secondary drug target effects using DNA microarrays. Nat Med (1998) 4(11):1293-1301.
3. Waring JF, Ciurlionis R, Jolly RA, Heindel M, Ulrich RG: Microarray analysis of hepatotoxins in vitro reveals a correlation between gene expression profiles and mechanisms of toxicity. Toxicol Lett (2001) 120(1-3):359-368.
4. Hamadeh HK, Amin RP, Paules RS, Afshari CA: An overview of toxicogenomics. Curr Issues Mol Biol (2002) 4(2):45-56.
5. Johnson JA: Drug target pharmacogenomics: An overview. Am J Pharmacogenomics (2001) 1(4):271-281.
6. Kruglyak L, Nickerson DA: Variation is the spice of life. Nat Genet (2001) 27(3):234-236.
7. van Someren EP, Wessels LF, Backer E, Reinders MJ: Genetic network modeling. Pharmacogenomics (2002) 3(4):507-525.
8. Vilo J, Kivinen K: Regulatory sequence analysis: Application to the interpretation of gene expression. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol (2001) 11(6):399-411.
9. Hardiman G: Microarray platforms - comparisons and contrasts. Pharmacogenomics (2004) 5(5):487-502.
10. Stafford P, Liu P: Microarray technology comparison, statistical analysis and experimental design. In: Microarray Methods and Applications - Nuts and Bolts. Hardiman G (Ed), DNA Press, Eagleville, PA, USA (2003):273-324. Provides an overview of four separate microarray platforms with sample data, including an examination of differences in spot morphology. Also discusses quality control methodology, and a procedure for determining technical and biological variability, with corresponding resolution of the expression array.
11. Golub TR, Slonim DK, Tamayo P, Huard C, Gaasenbeek M, Mesirov JP, Coller H, Loh ML, Downing JR, Caligiuri MA, Bloomfield CD et al: Molecular classification of cancer: Class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science (1999) 286(5439):531-537. Seminal publication that indicates the power of gene expression and microarray technologies, and demonstrates accurate classification of the hematological malignancies AML and ALL.
12. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, Pollack JR, Ross DT, Johnsen H, Akslen LA, Fluge O et al: Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature (2000) 406(6797):747-752.
13. Garber ME, Troyanskaya OG, Schluens K, Petersen S, Thaesler Z, Pacyna-Gengelbach M, van de Rijn M, Rosen GD, Perou CM, Whyte RI, Petersen I et al: Diversity of gene expression in adenocarcinoma of the lung. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2001) 98(24):13784-13789.
14. Bhattacharjee A, Richards WG, Staunton J, Li C, Monti S, Vasa P, Ladd C, Beheshti J, Bueno R, Gillette M, Loda M, Meyerson M et al: Classification of human lung carcinomas by mRNA expression profiling reveals distinct adenocarcinoma subclasses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2001) 98(24):13790-13795.
15. van 't Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, Peterse HL, van der Kooy K, Marton MJ, Witteveen AT, Schreiber GJ et al: Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature (2002) 415(6871):530-536.
16. Beer DG, Kardia SL, Huang CC, Giordano TJ, Levin AM, Misek DE, Lin L, Chen G, Gharib TG, Thomas DG, Lizyness ML et al: Gene-expression profiles predict survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Nat Med (2002) 8(8):816-824.
17. Chee M, Yang R, Hubbell E, Bemo A, Huang XC, Stem D, Winkler J, Lockhart DJ, Morris MS, Fodor SP: Accessing genetic information with high-density DNAarrays. Science (1996) 274(5287):610-614.
18. Schena M, Shalon D, Davis RW, Brown PO: Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray. Science (1995) 270(5235):467-470.
19. Knight J: When the chips are down. Nature (2001) 410(6831):860-861. The enormous power of DNA microarray technology is also the source of many of its problems. Errors in handling cDNA clones and cross contamination issues are discussed in this article.
20. Hughes TR, Mao M, Jones AR, Burchard J, Marton MJ, Shannon KW, Lefkowitz SM, Ziman M, Schelter JM, Meyer MR, Kobayashi S et al: Expression profiling using microarrays fabricated by an ink-jet oligonucleotide synthesizer. Nat Biotechnol (2001) 19(4):342-347.
21. Ramakrishnan R, Dorris D, Lublinsky A, Nguyen A, Domanus M, Prokhorova A, Gieser L, Touma E, Lockner R, Tata M, Zhu X et al: An assessment of Motorola CodeLink™ microarray performance for gene expression profiling applications. Nucleic Acids Res (2002) 30(7):e30.
22. Kothapalli R, Yoder SJ, Mane S, Loughran TP: Microarray results: How accurate are they? BMC Bioinformatics (2002) 3(1):22. Provides a critical evaluation of microarray data obtained from two different commercially available systems, revealing several inconsistencies in the data obtained from the two different microarrays.
23. Kuo WP, Jenssen TK, Butte AJ, Ohno-Machado L, Kohane IS: Analysis of matched mRNA measurements from two different microarray technologies. Bioinformatics (2002) 18(3):405-412. Presents a comparison of mRNA measurements for 56 cancer cell lines using Stanford type cDNA microarrays and Affymetrix oligonucleotide microarrays.
24. Li J, Pankratz M, Johnson JA: Differential gene expression patterns revealed by oligonucleotide versus long cDNA arrays. Toxicol Sci (2002) 69(2)1383-390. Data generated from oligonucleotide rather than cDNA microarrays were found to be more reliable for interrogating changes in gene expression.
25. Woo Y, Affourtit J, Daigle S, Viale A, Johnson K, Naggert J, Churchill G: A comparison of cDNA, oligonucleotide and Affymetrix GeneChip gene expression microarray platforms. J Biomol Tech (2004) 15(4):276-284. Good concordance was observed in both the estimated expression level and statistical significance of common genes between the Affymetrix MOE430A GeneChip and oligonucleotide arrays. Despite high precision, cDNA arrays demonstrated poor concordance with other platforms.
26. Barczak A, Rodriguez MW, Hanspers K, Koth LL, Tai YC, Bolstad BM, Speed TP, Erle DJ: Spotted long oligonucleotide arrays for human gene expression analysis. Genome Res (2003) 13(7):1775-1785. Provides a comparison of Affymetrix GeneChip and spotted 70mer oligonucleotide arrays, revealing strong correlations (r = 0.8 to 0.9) between relative gene expression measurements.
27. Tan PK, Downey TJ, Spitznagel EL Jr. Xu P, Fu D, Dimitrov DS, Lempicki RA, Raaka BM, Cam MC: Evaluation of gene expression measurements from commercial microarray platforms. Nucleic Acids Res (2003) 31(19):5676-5684. Provides a comparison of gene expression measurements generated from identical RNA preparations that were obtained using three commercially available microarray platforms.
28. Yauk CL, Bemdt ML, Williams A, Douglas GR: Comprehensive comparison of six microarray technologies. Nucleic Acids Res (2004) 32(15):e124. Presents an exploration and validation of the hypothesis that gene expression profiles are biological rather than technological
29. Mecham BH, Klus GT, Strovel J, Augustus M, Byme D, Bozso P, Wetmore DZ, Manani TJ, Kohane IS, Szallasi Z: Sequence-matched probes produce increased cross-platform consistency and more reproducible biological results in microarray-based gene expression measurements. Nucleic Acids Res (2004) 32(9):e74. Demonstrates that sequence-based probe matching produces more consistent results than identifier-based probe matching.
30. Wang H, Hubbell E, Hu JS, Mei G, Cline M, Lu G, Clark T, Siani-Rose MA, Ares M, Kulp DC, Haussler D: Gene structure-based splice variant deconvolution using a microarray platform. Bioinformatics (2003) 19(Suppl 1):I315-I322.
31. Auer H, Lyianarachchi S, Newsom D, Klisovic MI, Marcucci G, Komacker K: Chipping away at the chip bias: RNA degradation in microarray analysis. Nat Genet (2003) 35(4):292-293.
32. Burke J, Davison D, Hide W: d2_cluster: A validated method for clustering EST and full-length cDNA sequences. Genome Res (1999) 9(11):1135-1142.
33. Rhodes DR, Barrette TR, Rubin MA, Ghosh D, Chinnaiyan AM: Meta-analysis of microarrays: Inter-study validation of gene expression profiles reveals pathway dysregulation in prostate cancer. Cancer Res (2002) 62(15):4427-4433. Describes the first meta-analysis model, which revealed that four prostate cancer gene expression datasets shared significantly similar results, independent of the method and technology used.
34. Choi JK, Yu U, Kim S, Yoo OJ: Combining multiple microarray studies and modeling inter-study variation. Bioinformatics (2003) 19(Suppl 1):i84-i90.
35. Zhou XJ, Kao MC, Huang H, Wong A, Nunez-Iglesias J, Primig M, Aparicio OM, Finch CE, Morgan TE, Wong WH: Functional annotation and network reconstruction through cross-platform integration of microarray data. Nat Biotechnol (2005) 23(2):238-243. Describes the identification of genes of similar function, without coexpression patterns, using yeast as a model system. 355-364