Data Submission and Quality in Microarray-Based MicroRNA Profiling

Abstract

Background Public sharing of scientific data has assumed greater importance in the ‘omics’ era. Transparency is necessary for confirmation and validation, and multiple examiners aid in extracting maximal value from large datasets. Accordingly, database submission and provision of the Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment (MIAME) are required by most journals as a prerequisite for review or acceptance. Methods In this study, the level of data submission and MIAME compliance was reviewed for 127 articles that included microarray-based microRNA profiling and that were published from July, 2011 through April, 2012 in the journals that published the largest number of such articles—PLOS ONE, the Journal of Biological Chemistry, Blood, and Oncogene—along with articles from nine other journals, including Clinical Chemistry, that published smaller numbers of array-based articles. Results Overall, data submission was reported at publication for less than 40% of all articles, and almost 75% of articles were MIAME-noncompliant. On average, articles that included full data submission scored significantly higher on a quality metric than articles with limited or no data submission, and studies with adequate description of methods disproportionately included larger numbers of experimental repeats. Finally, for several articles that were not MIAME-compliant, data re-analysis revealed less than complete support for the published conclusions, in one case leading to retraction. Conclusions These findings buttress the hypothesis that reluctance to share data is associated with low study quality and suggest that most miRNA array investigations are underpowered and/or potentially compromised by a lack of appropriate reporting and data submission.

Reproducibility in Science

“…Furthermore, reanalysis of data often did not support the original conclusions. 30 Similar observations have been made by others. 23,25 An analysis of 500 papers in the 50 top journals across scientific fields (those with highest impact factors) revealed only 9% deposited full primary data online.…”

Circulating MicroRNA Biomarker Studies: Pitfalls and Potential Solutions

“…For additional profiling of unfractionated plasma or serum, the foremost concerns are to establish standardized sampling and processing protocols (43)(44)(45)(46); account for the effects of RNA extraction methods (9,47,48 ), profiling platforms (49,50 ), and analysis (46 ); and develop and adhere to norms for reporting of methods and data (12,(51)(52)(53)(54). These issues have been addressed adequately elsewhere and also apply to other biofluids and more-focused studies on EVs.…”

A FAIR-Based Approach to Enhancing the Discovery and Re-Use of Transcriptomic Data Assets for Nuclear Receptor Signaling Pathways

“…As a consequence, for the vast majority of journals we have encountered during our biocuration activities, deposition of a high quality, well annotated dataset, and inclusion of its accession number in the final published version of the article, are entirely at the author's discretion. Due to a lack of academic incentivization and unwillingness or inability on the part of many principal investigators to commit time and resources, many ' omics scale datasets are absent from public repositories (Ochsner et al, 2008, Witwer, 2013. Among the more ironic manifestations of this situation are those articles supported by unarchived transcriptomic datasets, but that validate their own findings using publically deposited transcriptomic datasets (Huber-Keener et al, 2012).…”