Normalization and Statistical Analysis of Multiplexed Bead-Based Immunoassay Data Using Mixed-Effects Modeling

Multiplexed bead-based flow cytometric immunoassays are a powerful experimental tool for investigating cellular communication networks, yet their widespread adoption is limited in part by challenges in robust quantitative analysis of the measurements. Here we report our application of mixed-effects modeling for the normalization and statistical analysis of bead-based immunoassay data. Our data set consisted of bead-based immunoassay measurements of 16 phospho-proteins in lysates of HepG2 cells treated with ligands that regulate acute-phase protein secretion. Mixed-effects modeling provided estimates for the effects of both the technical and biological sources of variance, and normalization was achieved by subtracting the technical effects from the measured values. This approach allowed us to detect ligand effects on signaling with greater precision and sensitivity and to more accurately characterize the HepG2 cell signaling network using constrained fuzzy logic. Mixed-effects modeling analysis of our data was vital for ascertaining that IL-1α and TGF-α treatment increased the activities of more pathways than IL-6 and TNF-α and that TGF-α and TNF-α increased p38 MAPK and c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) phospho-protein levels in a synergistic manner. Moreover, we used mixed-effects modeling-based technical effect estimates to reveal the substantial variance contributed by batch effects along with the absence of loading order and assay plate position effects. We conclude that mixed-effects modeling enabled additional insights to be gained from our data than would otherwise be possible and we discuss how this methodology can play an important role in enhancing the value of experiments employing multiplexed bead-based immunoassays.United States. Army Research Office (Contract W911NF-09-D-0001)National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH P50-GM68762

Systematic evaluation of immune regulation and modulation

Cancer immunotherapies are showing promising clinical results in a variety of malignancies. Monitoring the immune as well as the tumor response following these therapies has led to significant advancements in the field. Moreover, the identification and assessment of both predictive and prognostic biomarkers has become a key component to advancing these therapies. Thus, it is critical to develop systematic approaches to monitor the immune response and to interpret the data obtained from these assays. In order to address these issues and make recommendations to the field, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer reconvened the Immune Biomarkers Task Force. As a part of this Task Force, Working Group 3 (WG3) consisting of multidisciplinary experts from industry, academia, and government focused on the systematic assessment of immune regulation and modulation. In this review, the tumor microenvironment, microbiome, bone marrow, and adoptively transferred T cells will be used as examples to discuss the type and timing of sample collection. In addition, potential types of measurements, assays, and analyses will be discussed for each sample. Specifically, these recommendations will focus on the unique collection and assay requirements for the analysis of various samples as well as the high-throughput assays to evaluate potential biomarkers

The Path to Clinical Proteomics Research: Integration of Proteomics, Genomics, Clinical Laboratory and Regulatory Science

Better biomarkers are urgently needed to cancer detection, diagnosis, and prognosis. While the genomics community is making significant advances in understanding the molecular basis of disease, proteomics will delineate the functional units of a cell, proteins and their intricate interaction network and signaling pathways for the underlying disease. Great progress has been made to characterize thousands of proteins qualitatively and quantitatively in complex biological systems by utilizing multi-dimensional sample fractionation strategies, mass spectrometry and protein microarrays. Comparative/quantitative analysis of high-quality clinical biospecimen (e.g., tissue and biofluids) of human cancer proteome landscape has the potential to reveal protein/peptide biomarkers responsible for this disease by means of their altered levels of expression, post-translational modifications as well as different forms of protein variants. Despite technological advances in proteomics, major hurdles still exist in every step of the biomarker development pipeline. The National Cancer Institute's Clinical Proteomic Technologies for Cancer initiative (NCI-CPTC) has taken a critical step to close the gap between biomarker discovery and qualification by introducing a pre-clinical "verification" stage in the pipeline, partnering with clinical laboratory organizations to develop and implement common standards, and developing regulatory science documents with the US Food and Drug Administration to educate the proteomics community on analytical evaluation requirements for multiplex assays in order to ensure the safety and effectiveness of these tests for their intended use

Multiplex assays for biomarker research and clinical application: translational science coming of age

Over the last decade, translational science has come into the focus of academic medicine, and significant intellectual and financial efforts have been made to initiate a multitude of bench-to-bedside projects. The quest for suitable biomarkers that will significantly change clinical practice has become one of the biggest challenges in translational medicine. Quantitative measurement of proteins is a critical step in biomarker discovery. Assessing a large number of potential protein biomarkers in a statistically significant number of samples and controls still constitutes a major technical hurdle. Multiplexed analysis offers significant advantages regarding time, reagent cost, sample requirements and the amount of data that can be generated. The two contemporary approaches in multiplexed and quantitative biomarker validation, antibody-based immunoassays and MS-based multiple (or selected) reaction monitoring, are based on different assay principles and instrument requirements. Both approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages and therefore have complementary roles in the multi-staged biomarker verification and validation process. In this review, we discuss quantitative immunoassay and multiple reaction monitoring/selected reaction monitoring assay principles and development. We also discuss choosing an appropriate platform, judging the performance of assays, obtaining reliable, quantitative results for translational research and clinical applications in the biomarker field