Comment on “Unbiased Statistical Analysis for Multi-Stage Proteomic Search Strategies”
- 2 February 2011
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by American Chemical Society (ACS) in Journal of Proteome Research
- Vol. 10 (4) , 2123-2127
- https://doi.org/10.1021/pr101143m
Abstract
Everett et al. recently reported on a statistical bias that arises in the target-decoy approach to false discovery rate estimation in two-pass proteomics search strategies as exemplified by X!Tandem. This bias can cause serious underestimation of the false discovery rate. We argue here that the “unbiased” solution proposed by Everett et al., however, is also biased and under certain circumstances can also result in a serious underestimate of the FDR, especially at the protein level.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Unbiased Statistical Analysis for Multi-Stage Proteomic Search StrategiesJournal of Proteome Research, 2009
- Reanalysis of Tyrannosaurus rex Mass SpectraJournal of Proteome Research, 2009
- The Paragon Algorithm, a Next Generation Search Engine That Uses Sequence Temperature Values and Feature Probabilities to Identify Peptides from Tandem Mass SpectraMolecular & Cellular Proteomics, 2007
- Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometryNature Methods, 2007
- Lookup Peaks: A Hybrid of de Novo Sequencing and Database Search for Protein Identification by Tandem Mass SpectrometryAnalytical Chemistry, 2007
- Dynamic Spectrum Quality Assessment and Iterative Computational Analysis of Shotgun Proteomic DataMolecular & Cellular Proteomics, 2006
- A Heuristic Method for Assigning a False-discovery Rate for Protein Identifications from Mascot Database Search ResultsMolecular & Cellular Proteomics, 2005
- TANDEM: matching proteins with tandem mass spectraBioinformatics, 2004
- A method for reducing the time required to match protein sequences with tandem mass spectraRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry, 2003
- Qscore: An algorithm for evaluating SEQUEST database search resultsJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2002