Gene expression data were analyzed with DNA-Chip Analyzer (dChip) (www.dchip.org). Briefly, unsupervised clustering of samples and genes was performed on a filtered gene list. Filtering consisted of selecting those genes with Coefficient of Variation (CV) greater than 1.0 and with expression values greater than 20 in at least 20 percent or more of the total microarrays. This filtering generated a list of 1,747 probesets corresponding to 1,316 unique genes which defined 3 differentially expressed groups by unsupervised hierarchical agglomerative clustering. The meningiomas within the first two of three sample branches revealed highly cohesive and intense expression clusters, while the third cluster of samples contained tumors which exhibited an independent clustering signature with less intense but distinct expression across the 1,747 probesets. To identify the underlying genetic signature of this third sample cluster, we applied an ad hoc secondary filtering Coefficient of Variation greater than 0.8 to these samples and identified 3,237 probesets (2,299 genes) identifying three child subgroups within this third branch by supervised hierarchical agglomerative clustering. These methods identified a total of five gene expression subgroups based on distinct gene expression profiles. Analysis settings were set at default unless otherwise specified. Distances were set to be “Pre-calculated”, and a “1-Correlation” distance metric was employed using “Centroid” as the linkage method. Expression data from samples which demonstrated chromosomal loss or retention over minimal loss regions according to Nexus 3.0 analyses were subsequently analyzed by dChip software using 2 group comparisons over the genomic areas of interest. Common losses observed only in a specific grade of tumors were determined, subsequently the expression of the genes within these regions were compared between tumors of matched grade with and without the deletion of the specified region. The identical analysis method was repeated for common losses observed only in grade III and grade II tumors, and finally repeated for common losses observed only in grade II and grade I tumors. “Lower expressing genes” were identified as those demonstrating greater than a 1.2 decrease in expression difference with t-test p-value thresholds ≤ 0.05 and FDR ≤ 10% after 100 permutations. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated using chromosome retention/loss calls generated by Nexus 3.0 in conjunction with the expression values exported from dChip. Gene lists were tested for enriched functional and biological themes using the MetaCore pathway web application by GeneGO, Inc., (www.genego.com/). The most significant biological gene network themes were calculated by identifying node genes present from our differential expression analyses uploaded to Metacore pathway analysis. Returned network themes were rank ordered by their hypergeometric p-values calculated during output list production. The resulting data with significance values and enrichment ratios are included in file Supplementary Information S3.
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol. The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Lee Y., Liu J., Patel S., Cloughesy T., Lai A., Farooqi H., Seligson D., Dong J., Liau L., Becker D., Mischel P., Shams S, & Nelson S. (2009). Genomic Landscape of Meningiomas. Brain Pathology, 20(4), 751-762.
Publication 2009
A 747 BiologicalChild Chromosome Deletion Dna chip Expression genes Gene networkGenes Genetic cluster Genomic Interest group Meningiomas MicroarraysNexus Retention Tumors
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations :
University of California, Los Angeles, Sunny BioDiscovery (United States)
Chromosomal loss or retention over minimal loss regions
dependent variables
Gene expression profiles
Expression of genes within chromosomal loss regions
control variables
Samples which demonstrated chromosomal loss or retention over minimal loss regions
Tumors of matched grade with and without the deletion of the specified region
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required