Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Ite A. Laird-Offringa

dblp:05/1696 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2004
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics › DNA methylation
DNA methylation analysis
0.012004
A comparison of cluster analysis methods using DNA methylation data · Bioinform. 2004
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene expression analysis
model-based clustering
0.012004
A comparison of cluster analysis methods using DNA methylation data · Bioinform. 2004
Bioinformatics and computational biology › cancer genomics › cancer subtype analysis
cancer subtype classification
0.012004
A comparison of cluster analysis methods using DNA methylation data · Bioinform. 2004

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

hierarchical clustering · 0.0bernoulli-lognormal mixture model · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2004 A comparison of cluster analysis methods using DNA methylation data
abstract
MOTIVATION: Aberrant DNA methylation is common in cancer. DNA methylation profiles differ between tumor types and subtypes and provide a powerful diagnostic tool for identifying clusters of samples and/or genes. DNA methylation data obtained with the quantitative, highly sensitive MethyLight technology is not normally distributed; it frequently contains an excess of zeros. Established tools to analyze this type of data do not exist. Here, we evaluate a variety of methods for cluster analysis to determine which is most reliable. RESULTS: We introduce a Bernoulli-lognormal mixture model for clustering DNA methylation data obtained using MethyLight. We model the outcomes using a two-part distribution having discrete and continuous components. It is compared with standard cluster analysis approaches for continuous data and for discrete data. In a simulation study, we find that the two-part model has the lowest classification error rate for mixture outcome data compared with other approaches. The methods are illustrated using DNA methylation data from a study of lung cancer cell lines. Compared with competing hierarchical clustering methods, the mixture model approaches have the lowest cross-validation error for detecting lung cancer subtype (non-small versus small cell). The Bernoulli-lognormal mixture assigns observations to subgroups with the lowest uncertainty. AVAILABILITY: Software is available upon request from the authors. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~kims/SupplementaryInfo.html
Kimberly D. Siegmund, Peter W. Laird, Ite A. Laird-Offringa
Bioinform.3