Analyzing Illumina Gene Expression Microarray Data from Different Tissues: Methodological Aspects of Data Analysis in the MetaXpress Consortium

Abstract

Microarray profiling of gene expression is widely applied in molecular biology and functional genomics. Experimental and technical variations make meta-analysis of different studies challenging. In a total of 3358 samples, all from German population-based cohorts, we investigated the effect of data preprocessing and the variability due to sample processing in whole blood cell and blood monocyte gene expression data, measured on the Illumina HumanHT-12 v3 BeadChip array.Gene expression signal intensities were similar after applying the log2 or the variance-stabilizing transformation. In all cohorts, the first principal component (PC) explained more than 95% of the total variation. Technical factors substantially influenced signal intensity values, especially the Illumina chip assignment (33–48% of the variance), the RNA amplification batch (12–24%), the RNA isolation batch (16%), and the sample storage time, in particular the time between blood donation and RNA isolation for the whole blood cell samples (2–3%), and the time between RNA isolation and amplification for the monocyte samples (2%). White blood cell composition parameters were the strongest biological factors influencing the expression signal intensities in the whole blood cell samples (3%), followed by sex (1–2%) in both sample types. Known single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were located in 38% of the analyzed probe sequences and 4% of them included common SNPs (minor allele frequency >5%). Out of the tested SNPs, 1.4% significantly modified the probe-specific expression signals (Bonferroni corrected p-value<0.05), but in almost half of these events the signal intensities were even increased despite the occurrence of the mismatch. Thus, the vast majority of SNPs within probes had no significant effect on hybridization efficiency.In summary, adjustment for a few selected technical factors greatly improved reliability of gene expression analyses. Such adjustments are particularly required for meta-analyses.

Genomewide meta‐analysis identifies loci associated with IGF ‐I and IGFBP ‐3 levels with impact on age‐related traits

“…Association analysis of whole blood gene expression data with serum IGF‐I and IGFBP‐3 levels was conducted in 986 samples of the SHIP‐TREND cohort (Schurmann et al ., 2012). …”

The potential of novel biomarkers to improve risk prediction of type 2 diabetes

“…In the context of risk assessment, blood samples appear to be the most suitable biomaterial for transcriptome analyses because they are routinely obtained clinically. Methods for the analysis of transcriptomics datasets in relation to phenotypes and disease risk are currently being developed [68].…”

CX3CR1 is dysregulated in blood and brain from schizophrenia patients

“…With increasing numbers of analyzed samples, it is important to apply normalization procedures that will balance effects that may arise from the heterogeneity in tissue regions, microarray platform, and sample quality that could collectively deteriorate the meta-analysis. Indeed, different methods have been proposed and discussed to conduct meta-analysis (Chang et al, 2013;Chen et al, 2011;Conlon et al, 2007;Lopez et al, 2008;Phan et al, 2012;Schurmann et al, 2012;Seita et al, 2012;Stevens and Doerge, 2005;Tian and Suarez-Farinas, 2013;Warnat et al, 2005).…”