Back

A Multimodal and Integrated Approach to Interrogate Human Kidney Biopsies with Rigor and Reproducibility: The Kidney Precision Medicine Project

El-Achkar, T. M.; Eadon, M. T.; Menon, R.; Lake, B. B.; Sigdel, T. K.; Alexandrov, T.; Parikh, S.; Zhang, G.; Dobi, D.; Dunn, K. W.; Otto, E. A.; Anderton, C. R.; Carson, J. M.; Luo, J.; Park, C.; Hamidi, H.; Zhou, J.; Hoover, P.; Schroeder, A.; Joanes, M.; Azeloglu, E.; Sealfon, R.; Winfree, S.; Steck, B.; He, Y.; D'Agati, V. D.; Iyengar, R.; Troyanskaya, O. G.; Barisoni, L.; Gaut, J.; Zhang, K.; Laszik, Z.; Rovin, B.; Dagher, P. C.; Sharma, K.; Sarwal, M.; Hodgin, J. B.; Alpers, C. E.; Kretzler, M.; Jain, S.; For the Kidney Precision Medicine Project,

2019-11-06 scientific communication and education
10.1101/828665 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Comprehensive and spatially mapped molecular atlases of organs at a cellular level are a critical resource to gain insights into pathogenic mechanisms and personalized therapies for diseases. The Kidney Precision Medicine Project (KPMP) is an endeavor to generate 3-dimensional (3D) molecular atlases of healthy and diseased kidney biopsies using multiple state-of-the-art OMICS and imaging technologies across several institutions. Obtaining rigorous and reproducible results from disparate methods and at different sites to interrogate biomolecules at a single cell level or in 3D space is a significant challenge that can be a futile exercise if not well controlled. We describe a "follow the tissue" pipeline for generating a reliable and authentic single cell/region 3D molecular atlas of human adult kidney. Our approach emphasizes quality assurance, quality control, validation and harmonization across different OMICS and imaging technologies from sample procurement, processing, storage, shipping to data generation, analysis and sharing. We established benchmarks for quality control, rigor, reproducibility and feasibility across multiple technologies through a pilot experiment using common source tissue that was processed and analyzed at different institutions and different technologies. A peer review system was established to critically review quality control measures and the reproducibility of data generated by each technology before being approved to interrogate clinical biopsy specimens. The process established economizes the use of valuable biopsy tissue for multi-OMICS and imaging analysis with stringent quality control to ensure rigor and reproducibility of results and serves as a model for precision medicine projects across laboratories, institutions and consortia.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.4%
2
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.6%
3
Lab Animal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
4
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 15%
7.0%
5
The FASEB Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.2%
6
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.9%
7
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 41%
2.5%
50% of probability mass above
8
Kidney360
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.0%
9
Nature Biotechnology
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
10
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
158 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
11
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.5%
12
FEBS Open Bio
31 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
13
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
14
Laboratory Investigation
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
15
The American Journal of Pathology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
16
Kidney International
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
17
Heliyon
152 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
18
PROTEOMICS
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
19
Wellcome Open Research
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.0%
21
Bioinformatics Advances
203 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
22
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.0%
23
Biology of Sex Differences
32 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
24
Cytometry Part A
33 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
25
American Journal of Physiology-Renal Physiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
Journal of Proteome Research
234 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
ACS Omega
105 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
28
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.9%
29
Frontiers in Immunology
638 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.9%
30
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%