Study design in DIGE-based biomarker discovery

Methods in Molecular Biology

Volumn 854, Issue , 2012, Pages 195-206

  Graf, Alexandra ^a   Oehler, Rudolf ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

Biomarker research; Clinical proteomics; DIGE; Power calculation; Sample size calculation; Study design

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TWO DIMENSIONAL DIFFERENCE GEL ELECTROPHORESIS;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; PROTEINS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TWO-DIMENSIONAL DIFFERENCE GEL ELECTROPHORESIS;

EID: 84858143899     PISSN: 10643745     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-61779-573-2_14     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Bossuyt, P.M., et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Clin Chem 49, 1-6 (2003). (Pubitemid 36078546)
2. McShane, L.M., et al. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies. J Clin Oncol 23, 9067-9072 (2005).
3. Mischak, H., et al. Recommendations for biomarker identifi cation and qualifi cation in clinical proteomics. Sci Transl Med 2, 46ps42 (2010).
4. Dudoit, S., Shaffer, J. & Boldrick, J. Multiple hypothesis testing in microarray experiments. Statistical Science 18, 71-103 (2003). (Pubitemid 41461823)
5. Shaffer, J.P. Multiple Hypothesis Testing. Annual Review of Psychology 46, 561-584 (1995).
6. Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate-A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 57, 289- 300 (1995).
7. Benjamini, Y. & Yekutieli, D. The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. The Annals of Statistics 29, 1165- 1188 (2001). (Pubitemid 33575263)
8. Storey, J.D. A direct approach to false discovery rate. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 64, 479-498 (2002).
9. Storey, J.D., Taylor, J.E. & Siegmund, D. Strong control, conservative point estimation and simultaneous conservative consistency of false discovery rates: a unifi ed approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 66, 187-205 (2004). (Pubitemid 38210666)
10. Pawitan Y., Michiels, S., Koscielny, S., Gusnanto, A. & Ploner, A. False discovery rate, sensitivity and sample size for microarray studies. Bioinformatics 21, 3017-3024 (2005). (Pubitemid 40916427)
11. Jung, S.H. Sample size for FDR-control in microarray data analysis. Bioinformatics 21, 3079-3104 (2005).
12. Petrak, J., et al. Deja vu in proteomics. A hit parade of repeatedly identifi ed differentially expressed proteins. Proteomics 8, 1744-1749 (2008). (Pubitemid 351678270)
13. Unlu, M., Morgan, M.E. & Minden, J.S. Difference gel electrophoresis: a single gel method for detecting changes in protein extracts. Electrophoresis 18, 2071-2077 (1997). (Pubitemid 27501267)
14. Directorate-General-Health-and-Consumer- Protection. Guidance for generating and reporting methods of analysis in support of pre-registration data requirements. Vol. Annex II (part A, Section 4) and Annex III (part A, Section 5) of Directive 91/414. (ed. EUROPEAN-COMMISSION) (Brussels, BE, 2000).
15. Biopharmaceutics-Coordinating-Committee. Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Validation. (ed. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, F.a.D.A., Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)) (Rockville MD 2057, USA, 2001).