z-logo
Premium
Multiple testing corrections in quantitative proteomics: A useful but blunt tool
Author(s) -
Pascovici Dana,
Handler David C. L.,
Wu Jemma X.,
Haynes Paul A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
proteomics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.26
H-Index - 167
eISSN - 1615-9861
pISSN - 1615-9853
DOI - 10.1002/pmic.201600044
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , computer science , proteomics , quantitative proteomics , false positive paradox , machine learning , biology , paleontology , biochemistry , gene
Multiple testing corrections are a useful tool for restricting the FDR, but can be blunt in the context of low power, as we demonstrate by a series of simple simulations. Unfortunately, in proteomics experiments low power can be common, driven by proteomics‐specific issues like small effects due to ratio compression, and few replicates due to reagent high cost, instrument time availability and other issues; in such situations, most multiple testing corrections methods, if used with conventional thresholds, will fail to detect any true positives even when many exist. In this low power, medium scale situation, other methods such as effect size considerations or peptide‐level calculations may be a more effective option, even if they do not offer the same theoretical guarantee of a low FDR. Thus, we aim to highlight in this article that proteomics presents some specific challenges to the standard multiple testing corrections methods, which should be employed as a useful tool but not be regarded as a required rubber stamp.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here