Many gene expression signatures were developed since the introduction of gene expression microarray technology, however, so far only in breast cancer two prognostic gene profiles are tested in large prospective trials (Bogaerts et al, 2006; Sparano, 2006; Wirapati et al, 2008; Weigelt et al, 2010).
As studies using microarray technology have evolved, so have the data analysis methods used to analyze these experiments.
Overexpression of cell cycle genes is indicative of cell proliferation, so microarray technology provides an alternative to proliferation assays.
In the past 6 years or so, microarray technology has been extensively used to investigate numerous human tumour types and other pathologies.
In this study, we sought to evaluate the accuracy of Nimblegen's microarray-based CGS resequencing technology so that the results obtained from experimental samples can be interpreted judiciously.
DNA microarray technology enables conducting experiments that measure RNA-transcript abundance (so called gene expression or expression degree) on a large scale of genomic sequences.
The microarray technology needs to be refined to generate high-quality data so that biologists can identify the gene regulatory relation more precisely.
The objective is to present the chemometrician with as clear a picture as possible of an evolving technology so that the strengths and limitations of DNA microarrays are appreciated.
To do so, several large-scale transcript detection technologies have been developed, chief among which are variants of microarray technology [ 1, 2], expressed sequence tags (ESTs) [ 3], and serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) [ 4].
Furthermore, nonspecific side effects can be detected with microarray technology.
