Both plasma and joint (synovial) fluid were therefore analyzed, and results were compared between duplicate spots within individual arrays, within the same sample type across different patients, and between sample types to highlight potential correlations and differences in autoantibody levels.
We found no difference between sample types.
Unsupervised clustering analysis of the most variable 101,691 probes (coefficient of variance > 0.2) revealed strong similarities between the two sample types within each individual.
The pooled specificity for lymph node tissue (0.93, 95% CI 0.70 - 0.99) was less than that for all tissue samples combined (0.98, 95% CI 0.87 – 0.99) (Table 2, Figure 3).> In contrast to specificity, sensitivity for TB was very heterogeneous within and between all sample types.
These comparisons, within and between the two sample types, appear in Figure 2B.
Our analysis replicated methods applied by Ye et al. (2011) and Preau et al. (2010) to partition the variance components among between-child, within-child between-day, and within-child within-day components for sample types with more than one sample per day (Table 3).
For an overview comparison between the different sample types, we merged the results found in the different faecal communities and displayed the overlapping genera within stress and normal groups in the Venn diagram as shown in Fig. 4.
Data analysis showed high reproducibility of expression within each FF and FFPE method, whereas matched FF and FFPE pairs demonstrated lower similarity, emphasizing an inherent difference between the two sample types.
Reproducibility studies showed concordance between SNP profiles for different sample types, such as blood, saliva, semen and hairs, for the same individual, both within and between different DNA extracts.
