Automatic Identification and Quantification of Extra-Well Fluorescence in Microarray Images.

In recent studies involving NAPPA microarrays, extra-well fluorescence is used as a key measure for identifying disease biomarkers because there is evidence to support that it is better correlated with strong antibody responses than statistical analysis involving intraspot intensity. Because this feature is not well quantified by traditional image analysis software, identification and quantification of extra-well fluorescence is performed manually, which is both time-consuming and highly susceptible to variation between raters. A system that could automate this task efficiently and effectively would greatly improve the process of data acquisition in microarray studies, thereby accelerating the discovery of disease biomarkers. In this study, we experimented with different machine learning methods, as well as novel heuristics, for identifying spots exhibiting extra-well fluorescence (rings) in microarray images and assigning each ring a grade of 1-5 based on its intensity and morphology. The sensitivity of our final system for identifying rings was found to be 72% at 99% specificity and 98% at 92% specificity. Our system performs this task significantly faster than a human, while maintaining high performance, and therefore represents a valuable tool for microarray image analysis.

[1]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  The WEKA data mining software: an update , 2009, SKDD.

[2]  J. Christopher Love,et al.  Crossword: A Fully Automated Algorithm for the Segmentation and Quality Control of Protein Microarray Images , 2014, Journal of proteome research.

[3]  Manuel Fuentes,et al.  NAPPA as a Real New Method for Protein Microarray Generation , 2015, Microarrays.

[4]  Todd H. Stokes,et al.  caCORRECT2: Improving the accuracy and reliability of microarray data in the presence of artifacts , 2011, BMC Bioinformatics.

[5]  Yanhui Hu,et al.  Genome-Wide Study of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Outer Membrane Protein Immunogenicity Using Self-Assembling Protein Microarrays , 2009, Infection and Immunity.

[6]  Joshua LaBaer,et al.  Immunoprofiling using NAPPA protein microarrays. , 2011, Methods in molecular biology.

[7]  Yanhui Hu,et al.  Next generation high density self assembling functional protein arrays , 2008, Nature Methods.

[8]  G. Wallstrom,et al.  Comparative Study of Autoantibody Responses between Lung Adenocarcinoma and Benign Pulmonary Nodules , 2016, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[9]  Joshua LaBaer,et al.  Plasma Autoantibodies Associated with Basal-like Breast Cancers , 2015, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[10]  Joshua Labaer,et al.  Protein microarray signature of autoantibody biomarkers for the early detection of breast cancer. , 2011, Journal of proteome research.

[11]  Mark Gerstein,et al.  ProCAT: a data analysis approach for protein microarrays , 2006, Genome Biology.

[12]  Xiaobo Yu,et al.  Identification of Antibody Targets for Tuberculosis Serology using High-Density Nucleic Acid Programmable Protein Arrays* , 2017, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[13]  Joshua LaBaer,et al.  Tracking the Antibody Immunome in Type 1 Diabetes Using Protein Arrays. , 2017, Journal of proteome research.

[14]  David D. Lewis,et al.  Naive (Bayes) at Forty: The Independence Assumption in Information Retrieval , 1998, ECML.

[15]  Joshua LaBaer,et al.  Autoantibody Signature for the Serologic Detection of Ovarian Cancer , 2014, Journal of proteome research.

[16]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.