Mapping Identifiers for Integrating Transcriptomics and Proteomics
Author Information
Author(s): Day Roger S, McDade Kevin K, Chandran Uma R, Lisovich Alex, Conrads Thomas P, Hood Brian L, Kolli VS Kumar, Kirchner David, Litzi Traci, Maxwell G Larry
Primary Institution: University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
Hypothesis
How do different identifier mapping resources compare in their ability to integrate transcriptomic and proteomic data?
Conclusion
The study highlights significant discrepancies among identifier mapping resources, which can impact the integration of transcriptomic and proteomic data.
Supporting Evidence
- The study analyzed 11,879 distinct protein UniProt accessions across the samples.
- Discrepancies among mapping resources were found to be significant.
- Proteomic and transcriptomic data integration is essential for biomarker discovery.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well different tools can match names of genes and proteins to help scientists understand cancer better.
Methodology
The study compared three identifier mapping resources using data from 91 endometrial cancer samples and 7 normal samples, analyzing the mapping of UniProt accessions to Affymetrix probesets.
Potential Biases
There may be biases in the mapping resources due to differences in data curation and algorithmic approaches.
Limitations
The study is limited by the reliance on specific mapping resources and the potential for misidentifications in the data.
Participant Demographics
Participants included 91 stage I endometrial cancer patients and 7 age-matched normal endometrial samples from post-menopausal women.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website