Our first lecture isn't about statistics or about genomics.
It's about reproducible research.
Reproducible research means that you can take someone's data and
their code, rerun it and
get the same answer exactly the same every time that that code and data are run.
So it turns out that this idea although it seems very simple
is a source of major problems.
So here's an example of a paper that people were incredibly excited
about in the area of genomics.
If you've heard about personalized medicine or
precision medicine, this seemed to be one of the huge success stories for that area.
In this paper there was a claim that you could use genomic signatures,
in specific gene expression signatures, to guide the use of chemotherapeutics.
In other words, you could tell what chemotherapy would work best for
which person based on their gene expression profiles.
So obviously this paper got a lot of excitement, and
tons of people rushed out to try to analyze the data, and see if they could
apply that same signature to the patients at their institution.
Two of the people that actually took this problem on at M.D.
Anderson were Keith Baggerly and Kevin Coombes.
So they're two statisticians who attempted to obtain the data and
rerun the analysis just so they can check and make sure that they knew how to do it
before they would apply it to their own patients.
But it turns out, during the process of trying to do this,
they discovered many problems.
So, for example, they noticed that a lot of the data weren't available and
a lot of the code weren't available.
Once they got the data and
code, it turns out that it didn't produce the results that they had in the paper.
They couldn't reproduce the pictures, and
they couldn't reproduce the results that were reported in the paper.
Maybe even more troubling, if you ran the code on different days at different times
you would get different answers, even if the same data was put through the code.
That was because there was a random component to the predictions.
So it turns out that this ended up being played out over a long saga.
And you can read a lot more about that saga in this paper that I have down here
linked to at the bottom of the slide.
But the basic idea is that Keith and Kevin attempted to get the data from
the investigators and they had trouble getting the data.
Once they did get the data they identified these problems.
But despite that, there was some clinical trials that got launched.
So it turns out that those clinical trials assigned people to chemotherapy,
possibly erroneously based on this original analysis, and
that actually led to some law suits.
Just to show you how important it can be to reproduce all of your data and
all of your code, obviously most problems that you're going to be working on,
won't have this level of importance and won't rise to this level of difficulty.
But it's important to keep in mind that having the data and
code available to reproduce exactly what you've done for this class and for
your future statistical genomic analyses is really important.
Jeff Leek, PhDAssociate Professor, Biostatistics
