Cloud-based solution to identify statistically significant MS peaks differentiating sample categories

Abstract

BackgroundMass spectrometry (MS) has evolved to become the primary high throughput tool for proteomics based biomarker discovery. Until now, multiple challenges in protein MS data analysis remain: large-scale and complex data set management; MS peak identification, indexing; and high dimensional peak differential analysis with the concurrent statistical tests based false discovery rate (FDR). “Turnkey” solutions are needed for biomarker investigations to rapidly process MS data sets to identify statistically significant peaks for subsequent validation.FindingsHere we present an efficient and effective solution, which provides experimental biologists easy access to “cloud” computing capabilities to analyze MS data. The web portal can be accessed at http://transmed.stanford.edu/ssa/.ConclusionsPresented web application supplies large scale MS data online uploading and analysis with a simple user interface. This bioinformatic tool will facilitate the discovery of the potential protein biomarkers using MS.

Distributed computing and data storage in proteomics: Many hands make light work, and a stronger memory

“…A different example of cloud computing in proteomics is provided by Stanford University's Computing Cloud to process MS datasets and compare protein abundance in order to discover possible biomarkers . The discovery of biomarkers using MS is a hot topic in proteomics and has been considered for a long time .…”

A proteomic clock for malignant gliomas: The role of the environment in tumorigenesis at the presymptomatic stage

“…ENU administration, rat CSF collection and subsequent histological analysis were as previously described [8]. CSF proteomic profiling and subsequent data analysis were as previously performed [9, 12–13]. Case (ENU) and control rat handling was in accordance with guidelines for animal safety and welfare.…”

“…The R-square difference of the clock in the normal group and the tumor group indicated that the tumor group did not follow the normal clock. In order to prove that this difference did not come from statistical randomness, we estimated the False Discovery Rate (FDR) in concurrent statistical tests, of the same size as our normal and tumor group; in multiple permutated “random” training data sets were constructed [13].…”

Pathway and Network Approaches for Identification of Cancer Signature Markers from Omics Data

“…ANOVA. Detection of differentially expressed genes/proteins, genotypes, biomarker filtering/selection [24] BRB:http://linus.nci.nih.gov/BRB-ArrayTools.html PAM: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~tibs/PAM/ SAM: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~tibs/SAM/ Pattern recognition Machine learning, Probabilistic, instance-based, kernel classification models. Clustering, multi-source data classification, biomarker selection and associations [25] Bayesian regression models [26], partial least squares [27], and Genetic Algorithm/KNN [28].…”