Cited by 47Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and ApplicationsGene expression and cancer classification

A Review of Imputation Strategies for Isobaric Labeling-Based Shotgun Proteomics

Open access
Bramer, Lisa M., Irvahn, Jan, Piehowski, Paul D., Rodland, Karin D., Webb-Robertson, Bobbie-Jo M.·2021·Journal of Proteome Research

Abstract

The throughput efficiency and increased depth of coverage provided by isobaric-labeled proteomics measurements have led to increased usage of these techniques. However, the structure of missing data is different than unlabeled studies, which prompts the need for this review to compare the efficacy of nine imputation methods on large isobaric-labeled proteomics data sets to guide researchers on the appropriateness of various imputation methods. Imputation methods were evaluated by accuracy, statistical hypothesis test inference, and run time. In general, expectation maximization and random forest imputation methods yielded the best performance, and constant-based methods consistently performed poorly across all data set sizes and percentages of missing values. For data sets with small sample sizes and higher percentages of missing data, results indicate that statistical inference with no imputation may be preferable. On the basis of the findings in this review, there are core imputation methods that perform better for isobaric-labeled proteomics data, but great care and consideration as to whether imputation is the optimal strategy should be given for data sets comprised of a small number of samples.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00123

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In large multiplexed experiments compared with label-free approaches, the missing-data pattern is distinct, but the overall relationship between abundance and missingness is similar.

    “Evaluating large, multiplexed experiments in comparison to label-free approaches, the pattern of the missing data appears to be very distinct, but the macrostructure overall is similar in regard to the relationship between abundance and missing data.(8)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [27]Chen LS; Prentice RL; Wang P A penalized EM algorithm incorporating missing data mechanism for Gaussian parameter estimation. Biometrics 2014, 70 (2), 312– 322. 24471933 PMC4061266
  2. [36]Josse J; Husson F Handling missing values in exploratory multivariate data analysis methods. J. Soc. Francaise Stat. 2012, 153 (2), 79– 99.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bramer, L. M., Irvahn, J., Piehowski, P. D., Rodland, K. D., & Webb-Robertson, B.-J. M.
Affiliations
  • Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US)
  • Boeing (United States) (US)
  • Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 902 Battelle Blvd., Richland, Washington 99354, United States
Venue
Journal of Proteome Research
Published
2020-09-15
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
1-13
ISSN
  • 1535-3893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-3907
OpenAlex
W3087749616
Cited by
47
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Proteome Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Istitutes of Health (U01-1CA184783, U24 CA160019)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Advanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
missing data imputation, isobaric labeling, shotgun proteomics, expectation-maximization algorithm, random forest imputation, small sample size, statistical inference
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Proteomics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review