Meta-analytic principal component analysis in integrative omics application

Bioinformatics

Volumn 34, Issue 8, 2018, Pages 1321-1328

  Kim, Sunghwan ^a   Kang, Dongwan ^b   Huo, Zhiguang ^c   Park, Yongseok ^c   Tseng, George C ^c,d  

^a Keimyung University   (South Korea)

^b LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; DNA METHYLATION; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENETICS; GENOMICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; HUMAN; MALE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METABOLISM; MOUSE; NEOPLASM; PHYSIOLOGY; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE; YEAST;

ANIMALS; DNA METHYLATION; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENOMICS; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; MALE; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MICE; NEOPLASMS; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE; YEASTS;

EID: 85046793991     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx765     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bhattacharya, S., and Mariani, T.J. (2009) Array of hope: expression profiling identifies disease biomarkers and mechanism. Biochem. Soc. Trans., 37, 855-862.
2. Cattell, R.B. (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behav. Res., 1, 245-276.
3. Domany, E. (2014) Using high-throughput transcriptomic data for prognosis: a critical overview and perspectives. Cancer Res., 74, 4612-4621.
4. Flury, B.N. (1984) Common principal components in k groups. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 79, 892-898.
5. Flury, B.N., and Gautschi, W. (1986) An algorithm for simultaneous orthogonal transformation of several positive definite symmetric matrices to nearly diagonal form. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput., 7, 169-184.
6. Friedman, J. et al. (2001) The Elements of Statistical Learning, Vol. 1. Springer Series in Statistics, Springer, Berlin.
7. Hoyle, D.C., and Rattray, M. (2004) Principal-component-analysis eigenvalue spectra from data with symmetry-breaking structure. Phys. Rev. E, 69, 026124.
8. Huo, Z. et al. (2016) Meta-analytic framework for SparseK-means to identify disease subtypes in multiple transcriptomic studies. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 111, 27-42.
9. Journée, M. et al. (2010) Generalized power method for sparse principal component analysis. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 11, 517-553.
10. Kang, D.D. et al. (2012) Metaqc: objective quality control and inclusion/exclusion criteria for genomic meta-analysis. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, e15.
11. Kim, S. et al. (2016) MetaKTSP: a meta-analytic top scoring pair method for robust cross-study validation of omics prediction analysis. Bioinformatics, 32, 1966-1973.
12. Krzanowski, W. (1979) Between-groups comparison of principal components. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 74, 703-707.
13. Krzanowski, W. (1984) Sensitivity of principal components. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B, 46, 558-563.
14. Lapointe, J. et al. (2004) Gene expression profiling identifies clinically relevant subtypes of prostate cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 811-816.
15. Li, J., and Tseng, G.C. (2011) An adaptively weighted statistic for detecting differential gene expression when combining multiple transcriptomic studies. Ann. Appl. Stat., 5, 994-1019.
16. Li, K.-C. et al. (2002) A simple statistical model for depicting the cdc15-synchronized yeast cell-cycle regulated gene expression data. Stat. Sin., 12, 141-158.
17. Lock, E. et al. (2013) Joint and individual variation explained (jive) for integrated analysis of multiple data types. Ann. Appl. Stat., 7, 523-542.
18. Qiu, W., and Joe, H. (2006) Generation of random clusters with specified degree of separation. J. Classification, 23, 315-334.
19. Richardson, S. et al. (2016) Statistical methods in integrative genomics. Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl., 3, 181-209.
20. Sill, M. et al. (2015) Applying stability selection to consistently estimate sparse principal components in high-dimensional molecular data. Bioinformatics, 31, 2683-2690.
21. Spellman, P.T. et al. (1998) Comprehensive identification of cell cycle-regulated genes of the yeast saccharomyces cerevisiae by microarray hybridization. Mol. Biol. Cell, 9, 3273-3297.
22. Tomlins, S.A. et al. (2007) Integrative molecular concept modeling of prostate cancer progression. Nat. Genet., 39, 41-51.
23. Tseng, G.C. et al. (2012) Comprehensive literature review and statistical considerations for microarray meta-analysis. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, 3785-3799.
24. Varambally, S. et al. (2005) Integrative genomic and proteomic analysis of prostate cancer reveals signatures of metastatic progression. Cancer Cell, 8, 393-406.
25. Wang, X. et al. (2012) Detecting disease-associated genes with confounding variable adjustment and the impact on genomic meta-analysis: with application to major depressive disorder. BMC Bioinformatics, 13, 52.
26. Weinstein, J.N. et al. (2013) The cancer genome atlas pan-cancer analysis project. Nat. Genet., 45, 1113-1120.
27. Witten, D.M. et al. (2009) A penalized matrix decomposition, with applications to sparse principal components and canonical correlation analysis. Biostatistics, 10, 515-534.
28. Yu, Y.P. et al. (2004) Gene expression alterations in prostate cancer predicting tumor aggression and preceding development of malignancy. J. Clin. Oncol., 22, 2790-2799.
29. Zou, H. et al. (2006) Sparse principal component analysis. J. Comput. Graph. Stat., 15, 265-286.