Turning straw into gold: building robustness into gene signature inference.

Abstract

Reproducible and generalizable gene signatures are essential for clinical deployment, but are hard to come by. The primary issue is insufficient mitigation of confounders: ensuring that hypotheses are appropriate, test statistics and null distributions are appropriate, and so on. To further improve robustness, additional good analytical practices (GAPs) are needed, namely: leveraging existing data and knowledge; careful and systematic evaluation of gene sets, even if they overlap with known sources of confounding; and rigorous testing of inferred signatures against as many published data sets as possible. Here, using a re-examination of a breast cancer data set and 48 published signatures, we illustrate the value of adopting these GAPs.