Limits of current approaches
What makes signatures fail.
Molecular signatures have a well-known reproducibility problem. Six causes are well documented in the literature; our platform is built to address each one.
Reproducibility
Published analyses replicate poorly
A team tried to reproduce 18 gene expression analyses published in Nature Genetics: only 2 could be reproduced in principle, 10 not at all.
Our answer: each panel is locked, versioned, then tested as is on independent cohorts.
Read · Ioannidis et al., 2009Chance
Random genes do just as well
In breast cancer, most signatures made of randomly chosen genes are significantly associated with outcome. An association does not prove that a signature measures anything specific.
Our answer: every signal is compared with random panels and with a generic inflammation score.
Read · Venet, 2011Evaluation
Overestimated performance
When the same data are used to choose a model and to measure its performance, the error is underestimated, sometimes badly.
Our answer: nested cross-validation, then external replication without retraining.
Read · Varma & Simon, 2006Batch effects
The lab leaves its mark
Processing date, reagent batch or measurement platform create spurious signals that can pass for biology.
Our answer: platform-by-platform harmonisation and replication in other laboratories, on other technologies.
Read · Leek et al., 2010Cell composition
Blood changes composition
A shift in blood cell proportions can mimic a disease signal in a bulk measurement.
Our answer: systematic control of cell composition and of usual inflammation markers.
Read · Shen-Orr & Gaujoux, 2013Single cohort
One dataset is not enough
Signatures derived from a single cohort generalise poorly; analysing several heterogeneous cohorts markedly improves reproducibility.
Our answer: discovery and mapping across hundreds of harmonised cohorts.
Read · Sweeney et al., 2017