The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study of common practices for the development and validation of microarray-based predictive models
Open accessAbstract
Gene expression data from microarrays are being applied to predict preclinical and clinical endpoints, but the reliability of these predictions has not been established. In the MAQC-II project, 36 independent teams analyzed six microarray data sets to generate predictive models for classifying a sample with respect to one of 13 endpoints indicative of lung or liver toxicity in rodents, or of breast cancer, multiple myeloma or neuroblastoma in humans. In total, >30,000 models were built using many combinations of analytical methods. The teams generated predictive models without knowing the biological meaning of some of the endpoints and, to mimic clinical reality, tested the models on data that had not been used for training. We found that model performance depended largely on the endpoint and team proficiency and that different approaches generated models of similar performance. The conclusions and recommendations from MAQC-II should be useful for regulatory agencies, study committees and independent investigators that evaluate methods for global gene expression analysis.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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 the citing paper
“Using the common intra-site DEGs to validate the called inter-site DEGs, the MCC41, 42 showed that PEER also yields a higher accuracy than the original limmavoom method (Supplementary Fig. 22d,e), indicating that global data normalization analysis methods such as PEER can also be used to improve RNA-seq data across both Illumina and the PGM platforms.”
From Detecting and correcting systematic variation in large-scale RNA sequencing data (2014) · cites this paper as [42]
In the citing paper
“for instance, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agency of the USA employed the MCC as the main evaluation measure in the MicroArray II / Sequencing Quality Control (MAQC/SEQC) projects [41, 42].”
From The advantages of the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation (2020) · cites this paper as [41]
In the citing paper
“Within the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study [7], we observed, however, that the performance of gene expression models in predicting clinical outcome was limited and largely dependent on the respective clinical endpoint.”
From Comparison of RNA-seq and microarray-based models for clinical endpoint prediction (2015) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“Within the MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study [7], we observed, however, that the performance of gene expression models in predicting clinical outcome was limited and largely dependent on the respective clinical endpoint.”
From Comparison of RNA-seq and microarray-based models for clinical endpoint prediction (2015) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“Considering the fact that the nature of the clinical endpoint strongly affects a classifier’s performance [7, 18], we included endpoints that are known to cover a broad range of predictive difficulties (low difficulty, SEX, and CLASS LABEL; intermediate difficulty, EFS ALL, and OS ALL; high difficulty, EFS HR, and OS HR).”
From Comparison of RNA-seq and microarray-based models for clinical endpoint prediction (2015) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“Evaluation of the prediction performances in the validation set revealed that the endpoint represents the most relevant factor affecting model performances, which is well in line with the findings of the MAQC-II study [7].”
From Comparison of RNA-seq and microarray-based models for clinical endpoint prediction (2015) · cites this paper as [7]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer
van 't Veer, L. J., Dai, H., van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., Hart, A. A. M., Mao, M., Peterse, H. L., van der Kooy, K., Marton, M. J., Witteveen, A. T., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415530a · Cited by 9,536
Unbiased Recursive Partitioning: A Conditional Inference Framework
Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., & Zeileis, A. (2006) · Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · doi:10.1198/106186006x133933 · Cited by 4,021
Comparison of Discrimination Methods for the Classification of Tumors Using Gene Expression Data
Dudoit, S., Fridlyand, J., & Speed, T. P. (2002) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214502753479248 · Cited by 2,671 · cited 1×
“Although previous studies have compared and benchmarked individual steps in the model development proces”
ResultMAQC Consortium, Shi, L., Shi, L., Reid, L. H., Jones, W. D., Shippy, R., Warrington, J. A., Baker, S. C., Collins, P. J., de Longueville, F., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1239 · Cited by 2,126
Self-citationThat BLUP is a Good Thing: The Estimation of Random Effects
Robinson, G. K. (1991) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177011926 · Cited by 1,694
Selection bias in gene extraction on the basis of microarray gene-expression data
Ambroise, C., & McLachlan, G. J. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.102102699 · Cited by 1,537 · cited 1×
“, poor data quality and/or insufficient cross-validation of all model development step”
BackgroundDavé, S. S., Wright, G. W., Tan, B. K., Rosenwald, A., Gascoyne, R. D., Chan, W. C., Fisher, R. I., Braziel, R. M., Rimsza, L. M., Grogan, T. M., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa041869 · Cited by 1,417 · cited 1×
“Previously, reanalysis of a widely cited single stud”
BackgroundMicroarray data analysis: from disarray to consolidation and consensus
Allison, D. B., Cui, X., Page, G. P., & Sabripour, M. (2006) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1749 · Cited by 1,339
Buyse, M. E., Loi, S., Veer, L. V., Viale, G., Delorenzi, M., Glas, A. M., Saghatchian, M., Bergh, J. C. S., Lidereau, R., Ellis, P., et al. (2006) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djj329 · Cited by 1,238
Shedden, K., Taylor, J. M. G., Misek, D. E., Chang, A. C., Hanash, S., Kuick, R. D., Beer, D. G., Enkemann, S. A., Yeatman, T. J., Eschrich, S. A., et al. (2008) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm.1790 · Cited by 1,176
The molecular classification of multiple myeloma
Zhan, F., Huang, Y., Colla, S., Stewart, P., Hanamura, I., Gupta, S. K., Epstein, J., Yaccoby, S., Sawyer, J. R., Burington, B. E., et al. (2006) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2005-11-013458 · Cited by 1,147
Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy
Michiels, S., Koscielny, S., & Hill, C. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)17866-0 · Cited by 1,021
Shaughnessy, J. D., Zhan, F., Burington, B. E., Huang, Y., Colla, S., Hanamura, I., Stewart, P., Kordsmeier, B., Randolph, C. E., Williams, D. R., et al. (2006) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2006-07-038430 · Cited by 916 · cited 1×
“Gene expression profiling of highly purified bone marrow plasma cells was performed in newly diagnosed patients with M”
BackgroundMultiple-laboratory comparison of microarray platforms
Irizarry, R. A., Warren, D., Spencer, F., Kim, I. F., Biswal, S., Frank, B. C., Gabrielson, E., Garcia, J. G. N., Geoghegan, J., Germino, G., et al. (2005) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth756 · Cited by 862 · cited 1×
“and confirmed that microarray technology is able to reliably identify differentially expressed genes between sample classes or population”
BackgroundSelf-citationOutcome signature genes in breast cancer: is there a unique set?
Ein‐Dor, L., Kela, I., Getz, G. A., Givol, D., & Domany, E. (2004) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bth469 · Cited by 798
Thalidomide and Hematopoietic-Cell Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma
Barlogie, B., Tricot, G. J. K., Anaissie, E. J., Shaughnessy, J. D., Rasmussen, E., van Rhee, F., Fassas, A., Zangari, M., Hollmig, K. A., Pineda‐Roman, M., et al. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa053583 · Cited by 731 · cited 1×
“Gene expression profiling of highly purified bone marrow plasma cells was performed in newly diagnosed patients with M”
BackgroundHess, K. R., Anderson, K., Symmans, W. F., Valero, V., Ibrahim, N. K., Mejia, J. A., Booser, D. J., Theriault, R. L., Buzdar, A. U., Dempsey, P. J., et al. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.05.6861 · Cited by 720 · cited 1×
“Genomic analysis of a subset of this sequentially accrued patient population were reported previousl”
MethodThousands of samples are needed to generate a robust gene list for predicting outcome in cancer
Ein‐Dor, L., Zuk, O., & Domany, E. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0601231103 · Cited by 699
Dupuy, A., & Simon, R. (2007) · Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djk018 · Cited by 658 · cited 1×
“, findings consistent with what was observed from a recent literature surve”
ResultEvaluation of DNA microarray results with quantitative gene expression platforms
Canales, R. D., Luo, Y., Willey, J. C., Austermiller, B., Bárbácioru, C., Boysen, C., Hunkapiller, K., Jensen, R. V., Knight, C. R., Lee, K. Y., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1236 · Cited by 622
Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Allison, D. B., Ball, C. A., Coulibaly, I., Cui, X., Culhane, A. C., Falchi, M., Furlanello, C., Game, L., Jurman, G., et al. (2009) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.295 · Cited by 551
Deng, M. C.-H. K., Eisen, H. J., Mehra, M. R., Billingham, M. E., Marboe, C. C., Berry, G. J., KOBASHIGAWA, J. A., Johnson, F. L., Starling, R. C., Murali, S., et al. (2005) · American Journal of Transplantation · doi:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2005.01175.x · Cited by 525 · cited 1×
“Gene expression data have also been the basis for the development of PCR-based diagnostic assays, including the xDx Allomap test for detection of rejection of heart transplant”
MethodPatterson, T. A., Lobenhofer, E. K., Fulmer-Smentek, S., Collins, P. J., Chu, T., Bao, W., Fang, H., Kawasaki, E. S., Hager, J., Tikhonova, I. R., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1242 · Cited by 494
Rat toxicogenomic study reveals analytical consistency across microarray platforms
Guo, L., Lobenhofer, E. K., Wang, C., Shippy, R., Harris, S., Zhang, L., Mei, N., Chen, T., Herman, D., Goodsaid, F. M., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1238 · Cited by 408
Decaux, O., Lodé, L., Magrangeas, F., Guérin‐Charbonnel, C., Gouraud, W., Jézéquel, P., Attal, M., Harousseau, J., Moreau, P., Bataille, R., et al. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.13.8545 · Cited by 377 · cited 1×
“and later on validated in three additional independent data set”
BackgroundLuo, J., Schumacher, M., Scherer, A., Sanoudou, D., Megherbi, D. B., Davison, T. S., Shi, T., Tong, W., Shi, L. M., Hong, H., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.57 · Cited by 333
Predictive ability of DNA microarrays for cancer outcomes and correlates: an empirical assessment
Ntzani, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)14686-7 · Cited by 323
Getting the Noise Out of Gene Arrays
Marshall, E. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.306.5696.630 · Cited by 302
Oberthuer, A., Berthold, F., Warnat, P., Hero, B., Kahlert, Y., Spitz, R., Ernestus, K., König, R., Haas, S., Eils, R., et al. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.06.1879 · Cited by 291 · cited 1×
“First, 502 preexisting 11 K Agilent dye-flipped, dual-color replicate profiles for 251 patients were provide”
BackgroundGanter, B., Tugendreich, S., Pearson, C. I., Ayanoĝlu, E., Baumhueter, S., Bostian, K. A., Brady, L., Browne, L. J., Calvin, J. T., Day, G.-J., et al. (2005) · Journal of Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2005.03.022 · Cited by 286 · cited 1×
“Gene expression data were generated using the Amersham Codelink Uniset Rat 1 Bioarray (GE HealthCare”
MethodMicroarrays and molecular research: noise discovery?
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)17878-7 · Cited by 271
Effect of training-sample size and classification difficulty on the accuracy of genomic predictors
Popovici, V. C., Chen, W., Gallas, B. D., Hatzis, C., Shi, W., Samuelson, F. W., Nikolsky, Y., Tsyganova, M., Ishkin, A., Nikolskaya, T., et al. (2010) · Breast Cancer Research · doi:10.1186/bcr2468 · Cited by 219
Fielden, M. R., Brennan, R., & Gollub, J. (2007) · Toxicological Sciences · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfm156 · Cited by 207 · cited 1×
“The study objective was to assess, upon short-term exposure, hepatic tumor induction by nongenotoxic chemical”
BackgroundPrognostic gene signatures for non-small-cell lung cancer
Boutros, P. C., Lau, S. K., Pintilie, M., Liu, G., Shepherd, F. A., Der, S. D., Tsao, M., Penn, L. Z., & Jurišica, I. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0809444106 · Cited by 203
Shi, L. M., Tong, W., Fang, H., Scherf, U., Han, J., Puri, R. K., Frueh, F. W., Goodsaid, F. M., Guo, L., Su, Z., et al. (2005) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-6-s2-s12 · Cited by 201
Gong, Y., Yan, K., Lin, F., Anderson, K., Sotiriou, C. P., André, F., Holmes, F. A., Valero, V., Booser, D. J., Pippen, J., et al. (2007) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(07)70042-6 · Cited by 190
Dobbin, K. K., Beer, D. G., Meyerson, M. M., Yeatman, T. J., Gerald, W. L., Jacobson, J. W., Conley, B. A., Buetow, K. H., Heiskanen, M., Simon, R. M., et al. (2005) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.565.11.2 · Cited by 176
Using RNA sample titrations to assess microarray platform performance and normalization techniques
Shippy, R., Fulmer-Smentek, S., Jensen, R. V., Jones, W. D., Wolber, P. K., Johnson, C. D., Pine, P. S., Boysen, C., Guo, X., Chudin, E., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1241 · Cited by 173
Self-citationSymmans, W. F., Ayers, M., Clark, E. A., Stec, J. J., Hess, K. R., Sneige, N., Buchholz, T. A., Krishnamurthy, S., Ibrahim, N. K., Buzdar, A. U., et al. (2003) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.11435 · Cited by 170 · cited 1×
“These specimens represent 70–90% pure neoplastic cells with minimal stromal contaminatio”
BackgroundCoombes, K. R., Wang, J., & Baggerly, K. (2007) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm1107-1276b · Cited by 148 · cited 1×
“A lack of consistency in generating classifiers from publicly available data is problematic and may be due to any number of factors including insufficient annotation, incomplete clinical identifiers, coding errors and/or inappropriate use of methodolog”
BackgroundShi, L. M., Perkins, R., Fang, H., & Tong, W. (2008) · Current Opinion in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2007.11.003 · Cited by 139 · cited 1×
“Therefore, the second phase of the project (MAQC-II) has focused on these predictive model”
Backgroundk-Nearest neighbor models for microarray gene expression analysis and clinical outcome prediction
Parry, R. M., Jones, W. D., Stokes, T. H., Phan, J. H., Moffitt, A. B., Fang, H., Shi, L. M., Oberthuer, A., Fischer, M., Tong, W., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.56 · Cited by 136
Evaluation of external RNA controls for the assessment of microarray performance
Tong, W., Lucas, A. B., Shippy, R., Fan, X., Fang, H., Hong, H., Orr, M. S., Chu, T., Guo, X., Collins, P. J., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1237 · Cited by 109
QA/QC: challenges and pitfalls facing the microarray community and regulatory agencies
Shi, L. M., Tong, W., Goodsaid, F. M., Frueh, F. W., Fang, H., Han, T., Fuscoe, J. C., & Casciano, D. A. (2004) · Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.1586/14737159.4.6.761 · Cited by 103
Dumur, C. I., Lyons‐Weiler, M. A., Sciulli, C., Garrett, C. T., Schrijver, I., Holley, T., Rodriguez‐Paris, J., Pollack, J. R., Zehnder, J. L., Price, M., et al. (2007) · Journal of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.2353/jmoldx.2008.070099 · Cited by 95 · cited 1×
“and the Pathwork Tissue of Origin Test to assess the degree of similarity of the RNA expression pattern in a patient's tumor to that in a database of tumor samples for which the origin of the tumor is know”
MethodVoluntary exploratory data submissions to the US FDA and the EMA: experience and impact
Goodsaid, F. M., Amur, S., Aubrecht, J., Burczynski, M. E., Carl, K., Catalano, J. G., Charlab, R., Close, S. L., Cornu-Artis, C., Essioux, L., et al. (2010) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd3116 · Cited by 88 · cited 1×
“Microarray-based gene expression data and prediction models are increasingly being submitted by the regulated industry to the FDA to support medical product development and testing application”
MethodClassification based upon gene expression data: bias and precision of error rates
Wood, I., Visscher, P. M., & Mengersen, K. L. (2007) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm117 · Cited by 76
Frantz, S. (2005) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1746 · Cited by 71
Zhan, F., Barlogie, B., Mulligan, G., Shaughnessy, J. D., & Bryant, B. M. (2008) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2007-10-119321 · Cited by 67
Oberthuer, A., Juraeva, D., Li, L., Kahlert, Y., Westermann, F., Eils, R., Berthold, F., Shi, L. M., Wolfinger, R. D., Fischer, M., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.53 · Cited by 67
Fan, X., Lobenhofer, E. K., Chen, M., Shi, W., Huang, J., Luo, J., Zhang, J. H., Walker, S. J., Chu, T.-M., Li, L., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.34 · Cited by 66
Thomas, R. S., Pluta, L., Yang, L., & Halsey, T. A. (2007) · Toxicological Sciences · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfm023 · Cited by 65 · cited 1×
“The study objective was to apply microarray gene expression data from the lung of female B6C3F1 mice exposed to a 13-week treatment of chemicals to predict increased lung tumor incidence in the 2-year rodent cancer bioassays of the National Toxicology Progra”
MethodHigh-resolution serum proteomic patterns for ovarian cancer detection
Baggerly, K., Edmonson, S. R., Morris, J. S., & Coombes, K. R. (2004) · Endocrine Related Cancer · doi:10.1677/erc.1.00868 · Cited by 64
Genomic indicators in the blood predict drug-induced liver injury
Huang, J., Shi, W., Zhang, J., Chou, J., Paules, R. S., Gerrish, K., Li, J., Luo, J., Wolfinger, R. D., Bao, W., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.33 · Cited by 63
Lobenhofer, E. K., Auman, J. T., Blackshear, P. E., Boorman, G. A., Bushel, P. R., Cunningham, M. L., Fostel, J. M., Gerrish, K., Heinloth, A. N., Irwin, R. D., et al. (2008) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-6-r100 · Cited by 51
Assessing Classifiers from Two Independent Data Sets Using ROC Analysis: A Nonparametric Approach
Yousef, W. A., Wagner, R. F., & Loew, M. H. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2006.218 · Cited by 41
Shi, W., Bessarabova, M., Dosymbekov, D., Dezső, Z., Nikolskaya, T., Dudoladova, M., Serebryiskaya, T., Bugrim, A. E., Guryanov, A., Brennan, R., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.35 · Cited by 41
Strauß, E. (2006) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2006.11.005 · Cited by 34 · cited 1×
“and confirmed that microarray technology is able to reliably identify differentially expressed genes between sample classes or population”
BackgroundChng, W. J., Kuehl, W. M., Bergsagel, P. L., & Fonseca, R. (2007) · Leukemia · doi:10.1038/sj.leu.2404934 · Cited by 34
Using DNA microarrays for diagnostic and prognostic prediction
Simon, R. M. (2003) · Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.1586/14737159.3.5.587 · Cited by 33 · cited 1×
“, poor data quality and/or insufficient cross-validation of all model development step”
BackgroundImmune Signatures in Follicular Lymphoma
Hong, W., Warnke, R. A., & Chu, G. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200504073521422 · Cited by 30
Hong, H., Shi, L. M., Su, Z., Ge, W., Jones, W. D., Czika, W., Miclaus, K. J., Lambert, C. G., Vega, S. C., Zhang, J., et al. (2010) · The Pharmacogenomics Journal · doi:10.1038/tpj.2010.24 · Cited by 23
Gur, D., Wagner, R. F., & Chan, H. (2003) · Academic Radiology · doi:10.1016/s1076-6332(03)00511-7 · Cited by 11
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chicco, D., & Jurman, G. (2020) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-019-6413-7 · Cited by 6,143
Applications of machine learning in drug discovery and development
Vamathevan, J., Clark, D., Czodrowski, P., Dunham, I., Ferran, E., Lee, G., Li, B., Madabhushi, A., Shah, P., Spitzer, M., et al. (2019) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/s41573-019-0024-5 · Cited by 3,228
Moffitt, R. A., Marayati, R., Flate, E. L., Volmar, K. E., Loeza, S. G. H., Hoadley, K. A., Rashid, N. U., Williams, L. A., Eaton, S. C., Chung, A. H., et al. (2015) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.3398 · Cited by 2,194
Self-citationOptimal classifier for imbalanced data using Matthews Correlation Coefficient metric
Boughorbel, S., Jarray, F., & El-Anbari, M. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177678 · Cited by 1,222
The genetic landscape of high-risk neuroblastoma
Pugh, T. J., Morozova, O., Attiyeh, E. F., Asgharzadeh, S., Wei, J. S., Auclair, D., Carter, S. L., Cibulskis, K., Hanna, M., Kieżun, A., et al. (2013) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.2529 · Cited by 1,198
Metadata
- Authors
- MAQC Consortium
- Venue
- Nature Biotechnology
- Published
- 2010-07-30
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 827-838
- ISSN
- 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
- 1087-0156
- 1546-1696
- PMC
- PMC3315840
- OpenAlex
- W2021560851
- Cited by
- 889
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 87 · 2013: 85 · 2012: 79
- FWCI
- 34.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
- Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
- Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Institute of Process Engineering, CAS Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- IRIS (submittedVersion)
- Repository of Futwangen University of Applied Sciences (Furtwangen University) (submittedVersion)
- SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (Z99 LM999999, Z99 HL999999, Z99 MH999999, Z99CL999999)
- National Cancer Institute (CA97513-01, CA55819-01A1, R00CA126184, P01CA055819, R33CA097513)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM074906, R01GM083084, R01GM083226, R01GM072611)
- National Center for Research Resources (R01RR021967)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Keywords
- microarray quality control, gene expression profiling, prediction model, genomic classifier, model validation, pulmonary toxicity, hepatotoxicity, breast cancer, multiple myeloma, neuroblastoma, rodent toxicity, method comparison, reproducibility
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Breast Neoplasms, Disease Models, Animal, Female, Humans, Liver Diseases, Lung Diseases, Multiple Myeloma, Neoplasms, Neuroblastoma, Predictive Value of Tests, Quality Control, Survival Analysis, Guidelines as Topic, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Rats
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
