Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15712126

Gene expression module discovery using gibbs sampling.

Abstract

Recent advances in high throughput profiling of gene expression have catalyzed an explosive growth in functional genomics aimed at the elucidation of genes that are differentially expressed in various tissue or cell types across a range of experimental conditions. These studies can lead to the identification of diagnostic genes, classification of genes into functional categories, association of genes with regulatory pathways, and clustering of genes into modules that are potentially co-regulated by a group of transcription factors. Traditional clustering methods such as hierarchical clustering or principal component analysis are difficult to deploy effectively for several of these tasks since genes rarely exhibit similar expression pattern across a wide range of conditions. Bi-clustering of gene expression data is a promising methodology for identification of gene groups that show a coherent expression profile across a subset of conditions. This methodology can be a first step towards the discovery of co-regulated and co-expressed genes or modules. Although bi-clustering (also called block clustering) was introduced in statistics in 1974 few robust and efficient solutions exist for extracting gene expression modules in microarray data. In this paper, we propose a simple but promising new approach for bi-clustering based on a Gibbs sampling paradigm. Our algorithm is implemented in the program GEMS (Gene Expression Module Sampler). GEMS has been tested on synthetic data generated to evaluate the effect of noise on the performance of the algorithm as well as on published leukemia datasets. In our preliminary studies comparing GEMS with other bi-clustering software we show that GEMS is a reliable, flexible and computationally efficient approach for bi-clustering gene expression data.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Chang-Jiun Wu, Yutao Fu, T M Murali, Simon Kasif. 2004. Gene expression module discovery using gibbs sampling.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15712126/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Clustering individuals using INMTD: a novel versatile multi-view embedding framework integrating omics and imaging data.

MOTIVATION: Combining omics and images can lead to a more comprehensive clustering of individuals than classic single-view approaches. Among the various approaches for multi-view clustering, nonnegative matrix tri-factorization (NMTF) and nonnegative Tucker decomposition (NTD) are advantageous in learning low-rank embeddings with promising interpretability. Besides, there is a need to handle unwanted drivers of clusterings (i.e. confounders). RESULTS: In this work, we introduce a novel multi-view clustering method based on NMTF and NTD, named INMTD, which integrates omics and 3D imaging data to derive unconfounded subgroups of individuals. According to the adjusted Rand index, INMTD outperformed other clustering methods on a synthetic dataset with known clusters. In the application to real-life facial-genomic data, INMTD generated biologically relevant embeddings for individuals, genetics, and facial morphology. By removing confounded embedding vectors, we derived an unconfounded clustering with better internal and external quality; the genetic and facial annotations of each derived subgroup highlighted distinctive characteristics. In conclusion, INMTD can effectively integrate omics data and 3D images for unconfounded clustering with biologically meaningful interpretation. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: INMTD is freely available at https://github.com/ZuqiLi/INMTD.

Cluster Analysis↗

A spatial scan statistic for ordinal data.

Spatial scan statistics are widely used for count data to detect geographical disease clusters of high or low incidence, mortality or prevalence and to evaluate their statistical significance. Some data are ordinal or continuous in nature, however, so that it is necessary to dichotomize the data to use a traditional scan statistic for count data. There is then a loss of information and the choice of cut-off point is often arbitrary. In this paper, we propose a spatial scan statistic for ordinal data, which allows us to analyse such data incorporating the ordinal structure without making any further assumptions. The test statistic is based on a likelihood ratio test and evaluated using Monte Carlo hypothesis testing. The proposed method is illustrated using prostate cancer grade and stage data from the Maryland Cancer Registry. The statistical power, sensitivity and positive predicted value of the test are examined through a simulation study.

Cluster Analysis↗

Analysis of cluster randomized cross-over trial data: a comparison of methods.

In a cluster randomized cross-over trial, all participating clusters receive both intervention and control treatments consecutively, in separate time periods. Patients recruited by each cluster within the same time period receive the same intervention, and randomization determines order of treatment within a cluster. Such a design has been used on a number of occasions. For analysis of the trial data, the approach of analysing cluster-level summary measures is appealing on the grounds of simplicity, while hierarchical modelling allows for the correlation of patients within periods within clusters and offers flexibility in the model assumptions. We consider several cluster-level approaches and hierarchical models and make comparison in terms of empirical precision, coverage, and practical considerations. The motivation for a cluster randomized trial to employ cross-over of trial arms is particularly strong when the number of clusters available is small, so we examine performance of the methods under small, medium and large (6, 18, 30) numbers of clusters. One hierarchical model and two cluster-level methods were found to perform consistently well across the designs considered. These three methods are efficient, provide appropriate standard errors and coverage, and continue to perform well when incorporating adjustment for an individual-level covariate. We conclude that choice between hierarchical models and cluster-level methods should be influenced by the extent of complexity in the planned analysis.

Cluster Analysis↗