Table 1 |
|||||||||
|
Results on cancer gene expression data |
|||||||||
|
Data set (ref.) |
n |
MCF,% |
CV,% |
TA,%(ref.) |
BS |
BS0 |
RFE |
RFE0 |
DE |
|
|
|||||||||
|
Golub (2) |
72 |
32 |
97.0 ± 4.2 |
99.3 (28) |
537 |
0 |
35 |
154 |
1007 |
|
Singh (4) |
136 |
43 |
92.6 ± 3.0 |
81.1 (27) |
99 |
0 |
48 |
312 |
3807 |
|
Alon (1) |
62 |
35 |
81 ± 7.2 |
97.9 (29) |
19 |
0 |
55 |
94 |
303 |
|
Wang (6) |
286 |
37 |
65 ± 4.3 |
N/A |
0 |
0 |
261 |
1250 |
106 |
|
van't Veer (5) |
97 |
47 |
62 ± 8.4 |
N/A |
0 |
0 |
42 |
153 |
1 |
|
|
|||||||||
|
Results are ordered by prediction accuracy. n, number of samples; MCF, minority class frequency; CVA, balanced cross-validated prediction accuracy, mean ± std.dev.; TA, balanced prediction accuracy of bootstrap signature on an independent test set (reference given in parentheses); BS, significant genes using the bootstrap with SVM at 5% FDR; RFE, genes chosen by recursive feature elimination; BS0 and RFE0, gene chosen by the bootstrap and RFE methods respectively on randomized data. DE, differentially expressed genes using the t-test at 5% FDR. |
|||||||||
|
Nilsson et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2009 10:38 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-38 |
|||||||||
