Bio

Academic Appointments


Teaching

2013-14 Courses


Publications

Journal Articles


  • Cell type-specific gene expression differences in complex tissues NATURE METHODS Shen-Orr, S. S., Tibshirani, R., Khatri, P., Bodian, D. L., Staedtler, F., Perry, N. M., Hastie, T., Sarwal, M. M., Davis, M. M., Butte, A. J. 2010; 7 (4): 287-289

    Abstract

    We describe cell type-specific significance analysis of microarrays (csSAM) for analyzing differential gene expression for each cell type in a biological sample from microarray data and relative cell-type frequencies. First, we validated csSAM with predesigned mixtures and then applied it to whole-blood gene expression datasets from stable post-transplant kidney transplant recipients and those experiencing acute transplant rejection, which revealed hundreds of differentially expressed genes that were otherwise undetectable.

    View details for DOI 10.1038/NMETH.1439

    View details for Web of Science ID 000276150600017

    View details for PubMedID 20208531

  • Using gene arrays in diagnosis of rejection CURRENT OPINION IN ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION Khatri, P., Sarwal, M. M. 2009; 14 (1): 34-39

    Abstract

    In the last decade, microarray technology has revolutionized biological research by allowing the screening of tens of thousands of genes simultaneously. This article reviews recent studies in organ transplantation using microarrays and highlights the issues that should be addressed in order to use microarrays in diagnosis of rejection.Microarrays have been useful in identifying potential biomarkers for chronic rejection in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, novel pathways for induction of tolerance, and genes involved in protecting the graft from the host immune system. Microarray analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from chronic antibody-mediated rejection has identified potential noninvasive biomarkers. In a recent study, correlation of pathogenesis-based transcripts with histopathologic lesions is a promising step towards inclusion of microarrays in clinics for organ transplants.Despite promising results in diagnosis of histopathologic lesions using microarrays, the low dynamic range of microarrays and large measured expression changes within the probes for the same gene continue to cast doubts on their readiness for diagnosis of rejection. More studies must be performed to resolve these issues. Dominating expression of globin genes in whole blood poses another challenge for identification of noninvasive biomarkers. In addition, studies are also needed to demonstrate effects of different immunosuppression therapies and their outcomes.

    View details for DOI 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32831e13d0

    View details for Web of Science ID 000264312900007

    View details for PubMedID 19337144

Conference Proceedings


  • Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants Morgan, A. A., Khatri, P., Jones, R. H., Sarwal, M. M., Butte, A. J. BIOMED CENTRAL LTD. 2010

    Abstract

    Combining the results of studies using highly parallelized measurements of gene expression such as microarrays and RNAseq offer unique challenges in meta analysis. Motivated by a need for a deeper understanding of organ transplant rejection, we combine the data from five separate studies to compare acute rejection versus stability after solid organ transplantation, and use this data to examine approaches to multiplex meta analysis.We demonstrate that a commonly used parametric effect size estimate approach and a commonly used non-parametric method give very different results in prioritizing genes. The parametric method providing a meta effect estimate was superior at ranking genes based on our gold-standard of identifying immune response genes in the transplant rejection datasets.Different methods of multiplex analysis can give substantially different results. The method which is best for any given application will likely depend on the particular domain, and it remains for future work to see if any one method is consistently better at identifying important biological signal across gene expression experiments.

    View details for DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-11-S9-S6

    View details for Web of Science ID 000290218700006

    View details for PubMedID 21044364

Stanford Medicine Resources: