Individual Olink® NPX datasets are normalized using either plate control normalization or intensity normalization methods. Plate control normalization is generally used for single plate projects or for Explore HT projects, while intensity normalization is generally used for multi-plate projects. Additionally, intensity normalization method assumes that all samples within a project are fully randomized.
In the case where all samples within a project are not fully randomized, or when a study is separated into separate batches, an additional normalization step is needed to allow the data to be comparable, since NPX is a relative measurement. The joint analysis of two or more Olink® NPX datasets often requires an additional batch correction step to remove technical variations, which is referred to as overlapping sample reference normalization, bridge normalization, or simply bridging.
Batches are groups of samples run at different times. They may or may not use the same lot of reagents, however bridging is recommended because good randomization across these sample batches is unlikely.
Bridging is also needed if Olink® NPX datasets are:
plate control normalized only and run conditions (e.g lab and reagent lots) have changes.
intensity normalized but from two different sample populations.
To bridge two or more Olink® NPX datasets, bridge samples are needed to calculate the assay-specific adjustment factors between datasets. Bridging samples are shared samples among datasets - that is that samples that are analyzed in both datasets. The recommended number of bridge samples are shown in the table below. Olink® NPX datasets without shared samples should not be combined using the bridging approach described below.
| Olink Product | Number of Bridge Samples |
|---|---|
| Target 96 | 8-16 |
| Explore 384: Cardiometabolic, Inflammation, Neurology, and Oncology | 8-16 |
| Explore 384: Cardiometabolic II, Inflammation II, Neurology II, and Oncology II | 16-24 |
| Explore 3072 | 16-24 |
| Explore HT | 16-32 |
| Reveal | 16-24 |
| Explore 3072 to Explore HT | 40-64 |
| Explore 3072 to Reveal | 32-48 |
The following tutorial is designed to provide an overview of the data combining methods that are possible using the Olink® bridging process. Before starting bridging, it is important to check if the same sample IDs were assigned to the bridge samples in both datasets.
Prior to running the second study, bridge samples must be selected
from the reference study and added to the second study. These samples
can be selected using the olink_bridge_selector() function
in Olink Analyze. The bridge selection function will select a number of
bridge samples based on the reference data. This function selects
samples that pass QC and have high detectability. In the cases where
detectability cannot be calculated from the test data set (ex: Explore
HT data), the function will only select samples which pass QC. External
controls are not selected as bridge samples as they are not
representative of the study and therefore may not cover the dynamic
range of assays that would be expressed within the samples. Note that
due to naming convention differences, it is necessary to exclude the
control samples automatically using the function
clean_npx(), or manually using the function
stringr::str_detect().
To select samples across the range of the data, the samples are
ordered by mean NPX value and selected across this range. When running
the selector, the sampleMissingFreq value represents the
maximum percentage of data below LOD allowed per sample. When running
plasma on smaller panels, such as Target 96,
sampleMissingFreq = 0.10 can be a good starting point.
Larger panels such as Explore HT have many proteins that are only
expressed in certain diseases or matrices and therefore more data below
LOD is expected. In this case sampleMissingFreq = 0.5 can
be a good starting point. Note that these values may need to be adjusted
based on the Olink product, sample matrix, and biological context of the
samples, for example, specific disease types.
sampleMissingFreq = 1 will provide a list of all eligible
samples, regardless of the % of data below LOD and the function output
provides the percent of assays below LOD
(PercAssaysBelowLOD) which can help inform a good starting
point for a specific study.
In this example we will demonstrate how to select 16 bridge samples
using the example data set npx_data1. First, we will check
the NPX file using the function check_npx() and pre-process
it using the function clean_npx() to investigate for
potential issues with the data and ensure it is in the correct format.
The check log list generated from the check_npx() function
is used to inform the cleaning process, and then the cleaned data can be
re-checked to confirm that the cleaning process has resolved all issues.
This process is shown in the example code below.
# Load example dataset (npx_data1)
npx_data1 <- OlinkAnalyze::npx_data1
# NPX file preprocessing
# Generate check log
check_log_npx_data1 <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data1
)
# Clean NPX
npx_data1_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::clean_npx(
df = npx_data1,
check_log = check_log_npx_data1
)
# Generate check log on cleaned data
check_log_npx_data1_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data1_clean
)The following code illustrates how to select the 16 bridge samples from the cleaned reference data. The selected bridge samples are displayed in Table 2.
# Using the already cleaned data from `clean_npx()`
bridge_samples <- OlinkAnalyze::olink_bridge_selector(
df = npx_data1_clean,
sample_missing_freq = 0.1,
n = 16L,
check_log = check_log_npx_data1_clean
)
# Excluding control samples manually. Naming convention may differ.
bridge_samples_manual <- npx_data1 |>
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL",
negate = TRUE
)
) |>
# In this case we skip the argument `check_log`. When `check_log` is not
# provided, the function will run it internally to check for other
# inconsistencies in the data such as duplicate sample IDs.
OlinkAnalyze::olink_bridge_selector(
sample_missing_freq = 0.1,
n = 16L
)| SampleID | PercAssaysBelowLOD | MeanNPX |
|---|---|---|
| B65 | 0.05 | 6.39 |
| B13 | 0.05 | 6.32 |
| B79 | 0.06 | 6.11 |
| A59 | 0.03 | 6.07 |
| A47 | 0.07 | 6.15 |
| B35 | 0.07 | 6.24 |
| B55 | 0.08 | 6.26 |
| B9 | 0.06 | 5.99 |
| B20 | 0.06 | 6.46 |
| A67 | 0.04 | 6.35 |
| A20 | 0.05 | 6.54 |
| B34 | 0.05 | 5.87 |
| B36 | 0.07 | 6.20 |
| B62 | 0.05 | 6.08 |
| A53 | 0.04 | 6.28 |
| A77 | 0.07 | 6.22 |
It is important to confirm that the selected bridge samples are representative of the overall samples within the study. This can be assessed visually with a PCA plot generated using the code below, where the bridge samples should be evenly dispersed among the other samples (Figure 1).
npx_data1_clean |>
dplyr::mutate(
Bridge = dplyr::if_else(
.data[["SampleID"]] %in% bridge_samples[["SampleID"]],
"Bridge",
"Sample"
)
) |>
OlinkAnalyze::olink_pca_plot(
color_g = "Bridge",
check_log = check_log_npx_data1_clean
)
Figure 1. PCA plot of bridge samples and other samples in dataset
npx_data1 (control samples excluded).
Bridging datasets are standard Olink® NPX tables. They can be loaded
using the read_NPX() function with default Olink Software
NPX files as input.
To demonstrate how bridging works, we will use the example datasets
(npx_data1 and npx_data2) from the
Olink Analyze package. This workflow also uses
functions from the R packages dplyr, stringr,
and ggplot2. The example datasets contain control samples
with duplicated SampleIDs across datasets. Because
downstream functions do not allow duplicates we will rename the control
samples to have unique SampleIDs by appending a unique suffix to the
control sample IDs in each dataset. This process is shown in the code
below.
# Load example dataset (npx_data1)
npx_data1 <- npx_data1 |>
# create unique extension as suffix for control samples
dplyr::mutate(
sid_ext = stringr::str_remove(
string = .data[["PlateID"]],
pattern = ".csv"
),
sid_ext = paste0(
stringr::str_split_i(.data[["sid_ext"]], "_", 4L),
stringr::str_split_i(.data[["sid_ext"]], "_", 3L)
),
) |>
# rename SampleIDs for control samples
dplyr::mutate(
SampleID = dplyr::if_else(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL"
),
paste0(.data[["SampleID"]], "_", .data[["sid_ext"]]),
.data[["SampleID"]]
)
) |>
dplyr::select(
-dplyr::all_of("sid_ext")
)
# Load example dataset (npx_data2)
npx_data2 <- OlinkAnalyze::npx_data2 |>
# create unique extension as suffix for control samples
dplyr::mutate(
sid_ext = stringr::str_remove(
string = .data[["PlateID"]],
pattern = ".csv"
),
sid_ext = paste0(
stringr::str_split_i(.data[["sid_ext"]], "_", 5L),
stringr::str_split_i(.data[["sid_ext"]], "_", 4L)
),
) |>
# rename SampleIDs for control samples
dplyr::mutate(
SampleID = dplyr::if_else(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL"
),
paste0(.data[["SampleID"]], "_", .data[["sid_ext"]]),
.data[["SampleID"]]
)
) |>
dplyr::select(
-dplyr::all_of("sid_ext")
)Further, we will preprocess the NPX files using the functions
check_npx() and clean_npx() as shown
earlier.
# NPX file preprocessing - npx_data1
# Generate check log
check_log_npx_data1 <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data1
)
# Clean NPX
npx_data1_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::clean_npx(
df = npx_data1,
# Retain control samples and assays
remove_control_assay = FALSE,
remove_control_sample = FALSE,
# Retain assay and QC warnings
remove_assay_warning = FALSE,
remove_qc_warning = FALSE,
check_log = check_log_npx_data1
)
# Generate check log on cleaned data
check_log_npx_data1_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data1_clean
)
# cleanup intermediate variables
rm(
npx_data1,
check_log_npx_data1
)
# NPX file preprocessing - npx_data2
# Generate check log
check_log_npx_data2 <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data2
)
# Clean NPX
npx_data2_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::clean_npx(
df = npx_data2,
# Retain control samples and assays
remove_control_assay = FALSE,
remove_control_sample = FALSE,
# Retain assay and QC warnings
remove_assay_warning = FALSE,
remove_qc_warning = FALSE,
check_log = check_log_npx_data2
)
# Generate check log on cleaned data
check_log_npx_data2_clean <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_data2_clean
)
# cleanup intermediate variables
rm(
npx_data2,
check_log_npx_data2
)Identify overlapping sample IDs between studies. Often, the same sample IDs are used as bridge samples in both NPX data sets, as shown in Table 3. Note that while external controls may share identifiers between datasets, theses samples are not bridge samples. External control samples often share the same naming convention across datasets but may represent different samples due to reagent batch differences. Additionally, external control samples are unlikely to cover the dynamic range of assays expressed in the study samples.
overlapping_samples <- dplyr::tibble(
SampleID = intersect(
x = npx_data1_clean[["SampleID"]],
y = npx_data2_clean[["SampleID"]]
)
) |>
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL",
negate = TRUE
)
) |>
dplyr::pull(
.data[["SampleID"]]
)| SampleID |
|---|
| A13 |
| A29 |
| A30 |
| A36 |
| A45 |
| A46 |
| A52 |
| A63 |
| A71 |
| A73 |
| B3 |
| B4 |
| B37 |
| B45 |
| B63 |
| B75 |
Then, gain an overview of the datasets that are going to be bridged.
For example, plot and compare NPX distribution between datasets, as
shown in Figure 2. By having a sense of how the studies compared to each
other before bridging, we can then determine the success of the bridging
process post bridging. Figure 2 shows a large overlap between
npx_data1 and npx_data2, however there are
still some differences as indicated by the blue and red areas on the
edge of the distribution.
# Expand the datasets to contain the Project column
npx_1 <- npx_data1_clean |>
dplyr::mutate(
Project = "data1"
)
npx_2 <- npx_data2_clean |>
dplyr::mutate(
Project = "data2"
)
# Combine the two data sets for visualization
npx_df <- dplyr::bind_rows(
npx_1,
npx_2
)
# Filter out control samples to avoid skewing the distribution
# and affecting downstream PCA results.
npx_df_no_ctrl <- npx_df |>
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL_SAMPLE",
negate = TRUE
)
) |>
# Mark bridge samples
dplyr::mutate(
Type = dplyr::if_else(
.data[["SampleID"]] %in% .env[["overlapping_samples"]],
paste(Project, "Bridge"),
paste(Project, "Sample")
)
) |>
# Ensure that SampleIDs are unique across projects for downstream functions.
dplyr::mutate(
SampleID = paste0(.data[["SampleID"]],
.data[["Project"]])
)
# Generate check log
check_log_npx_df_no_ctrl <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_df_no_ctrl
)
# Plot NPX density before bridging
npx_df_no_ctrl |>
ggplot2::ggplot(
mapping = ggplot2::aes(
x = .data[["NPX"]],
fill = .data[["Project"]]
)
) +
ggplot2::geom_density(
alpha = 0.4
) +
ggplot2::facet_grid(
cols = ggplot2::vars(.data[["Panel"]])
) +
OlinkAnalyze::olink_fill_discrete(
coloroption = c("red", "darkblue")
) +
OlinkAnalyze::set_plot_theme() +
ggplot2::ggtitle(
label = "Before bridging: NPX distribution"
) +
ggplot2::theme(
axis.title.x = ggplot2::element_blank(),
axis.title.y = ggplot2::element_blank(),
strip.text = ggplot2::element_text(size = 16L),
legend.title = ggplot2::element_blank(),
legend.position = "top"
)Figure 2. Density plot of NPX distribution in both datasets before bridging.
Use a PCA plot as shown in Figure 3 to visualize sample-to-sample distance before bridging. Typically the project dataset accounts for most of the observed variation within the combined datasets at this point. Control samples not included in the PCA plot because they are not expected to be representative of the rest of the dataset, and therefore the variation between sample and control samples could skew the PCA, making it more challenging to see differences between projects. Additional, the PCA function does not support multiple samples with the same identifier, which is also why the bridge samples in the second project are appended with “_new”. In Figure 3, data1 and data2 separate along PC1, indicating batch differences between the two datasets.
if (requireNamespace(package = "ggpubr", quietly = TRUE)) {
# PCA plot
OlinkAnalyze::olink_pca_plot(
df = npx_df_no_ctrl,
color_g = "Type",
byPanel = TRUE,
check_log = check_log_npx_df_no_ctrl
)
}Figure 3. PCA plot of both datasets before bridging.
We can use olink_normalization_bridge() function to
bridge two datasets. The bridging procedure is to first calculate
the median of the paired NPX
differences per assay between the bridge samples as
adjustment factor then use these adjustment factors to adjust NPX values
between two datasets. In this process, one dataset is considered the
reference dataset (df1) and its NPX values remain
unaltered. The other dataset is considered the new dataset
(df2) and is adjusted to the reference dataset based on the
adjustment factors.
The output from olink_normalization_bridge() function is
a NPX table with adjusted NPX value in the column NPX, as
shown in Table 4. olink_normalization_bridge() is a wrapper
for and supersedes olink_normalization() .
olink_normalization_bridge() creates a new column
Project to distinguish between reference dataset from the
other dataset. It is up to the user to define which dataset is the
reference dataset and specify the names of the bridge samples. The
resulting dataset will contain the reference dataset, which will be
identical to the input reference data, with adjustment factors of 0, and
the newly bridged dataset.
NOTE: The alternative quantification columns (for example: Quantified value, count, and Ct data) are not normalized.
overlapping_samples_list <- list(
"DF1" = overlapping_samples,
"DF2" = overlapping_samples
)
# Perform bridging
npx_df_br <- OlinkAnalyze::olink_normalization_bridge(
project_1_df = npx_data1_clean,
project_2_df = npx_data2_clean,
bridge_samples = overlapping_samples_list,
project_1_name = "data1",
project_2_name = "data2",
project_ref_name = "data1",
project_1_check_log = check_log_npx_data1_clean,
project_2_check_log = check_log_npx_data2_clean
)
# generate check log on bridged data
check_log_npx_df_br <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_df_br
)| SampleID | Index | OlinkID | UniProt | Assay | MissingFreq | Panel_Version | PlateID | QC_Warning | LOD | NPX | Subject | Treatment | Site | Time | Project | Panel | Adj_factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | 1 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 13.0 | ID1 | Untreated | Site_D | Baseline | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A2 | 2 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 11.3 | ID1 | Untreated | Site_D | Week.6 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A3 | 3 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 25.5 | ID1 | Untreated | Site_D | Week.12 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A4 | 4 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 14.5 | ID2 | Untreated | Site_C | Baseline | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A5 | 5 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 7.6 | ID2 | Untreated | Site_C | Week.6 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A6 | 6 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 6.3 | ID2 | Untreated | Site_C | Week.12 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A7 | 7 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 12.7 | ID3 | Untreated | Site_D | Baseline | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A8 | 8 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 13.7 | ID3 | Untreated | Site_D | Week.6 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| CONTROL_SAMPLE_AS 1_CAM1 | 9 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 16.2 | NA | NA | NA | NA | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
| A9 | 10 | OID01216 | O00533 | CHL1 | 0 | v.1201 | Example_Data_1_CAM.csv | Pass | 2.4 | 6.1 | ID3 | Untreated | Site_D | Week.12 | data1 | Olink Cardiometabolic | 0 |
olink_normalization_bridge() also supports data where
the overlapping samples (bridge samples) are not named the same in both
projects. In this case the overlapping_samples_list will
contain 2 arrays of equal length where the index of each entry
corresponds to the same sample. For example, if a sample has the
SampleID Sample_1_Aliquot_1 in the first batch
and Sample_1_Aliquot_2 in the second batch, then the
overlapping_samples_list should be defined as follows.
First, check the NPX distribution in datasets after bridging, as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 shows a larger overlap in projects than seen in Figure 2, as indicated by fewer areas of red and blue along the outside of the distribution.
# Filter out control samples to avoid skewing the distribution
# and affecting downstream PCA results.
npx_df_br_no_ctrl <- npx_df_br |>
# Remove control samples
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL_SAMPLE",
negate = TRUE
)
) |>
# Mark bridge samples
dplyr::mutate(
Type = dplyr::if_else(
.data[["SampleID"]] %in% .env[["overlapping_samples"]],
paste(.data[["Project"]], "Bridge"),
paste(.data[["Project"]], "Sample")
)
) |>
dplyr::mutate(
SampleID = paste0(.data[["SampleID"]],
.data[["Project"]])
)
# Generate check log
check_log_npx_df_br_no_ctrl <- OlinkAnalyze::check_npx(
df = npx_df_br_no_ctrl
)
# Plot NPX density after bridging
npx_df_br_no_ctrl |>
dplyr::mutate(
Panel = gsub(
pattern = "Olink ",
replacement = "", x = .data[["Panel"]]
)
) |>
ggplot2::ggplot(
mapping = ggplot2::aes(
x = .data[["NPX"]],
fill = .data[["Project"]]
)
) +
ggplot2::geom_density(
alpha = 0.4
) +
ggplot2::facet_grid(
cols = ggplot2::vars(.data[["Panel"]])
) +
OlinkAnalyze::olink_fill_discrete(
coloroption = c("red", "darkblue")
) +
OlinkAnalyze::set_plot_theme() +
ggplot2::ggtitle(
label = "After bridging: NPX distribution"
) +
ggplot2::theme(
axis.title.x = ggplot2::element_blank(),
axis.title.y = ggplot2::element_blank(),
strip.text = ggplot2::element_text(size = 16L),
legend.title = ggplot2::element_blank(),
legend.position = "top"
)Figure 4. Density plot of NPX distribution in both datasets after bridging.
Then, summarize number of assays that have adjustment factors in certain ranges. High adjustment factors can result from variations between projects, such as panel versions or technical modifications. The cutoff of a deviating adjustment factor is subjective and depends on a variety of factors including the distribution of adjustment factors, as shown in Figure 5. While there are a few assays with adjustment factors between 2 and 4 and -2 and -4, the majority of the adjustment factors shown in Figure 5 occur between -2 and 2.
Such assays can be visualized individually with violin plots, as shown in Figure 6, and may warrant further investigation to confirm they are still comparable between projects. For example, if a violin plot exhibits a different range or truncated distribution, this may suggest that the assay is below LOD or at hook in one of the data sets. However, as long as the bridge samples are not at hook or below LOD, this should not impact the bridging quality. For projects with differing clinical phenotypes, it is more informative to look at the similarities between the bridge samples than the similarity between the datasets, as indicated by the overlaid black dots in Figure 6.
Figure 5. Histogram of adjustment factors in normalized data from
dataset npx_data2.
The distribution of CHL1 between projects is visualized for demonstration purposes.
# Bridge sample data
bridge_samples <- npx_df |>
dplyr::filter(
.data[["SampleID"]] %in% .env[["overlapping_samples"]]
) |>
dplyr::filter(
.data[["Assay"]] == "CHL1"
) |>
dplyr::mutate(
Assay_OID = paste(.data[["Assay"]], .data[["OlinkID"]], sep = "\n")
)
# Generate violin plot for CHL1
npx_df_no_ctrl |>
dplyr::filter(
.data[["Assay"]] == "CHL1"
) |>
dplyr::mutate(
Assay_OID = paste(.data[["Assay"]], .data[["OlinkID"]], sep = "\n")
) |>
ggplot2::ggplot(
mapping = ggplot2::aes(
x = .data[["Project"]],
y = .data[["NPX"]]
)
) +
ggplot2::geom_violin(
mapping = ggplot2::aes(
fill = .data[["Project"]]
)
) +
ggplot2::geom_point(
data = bridge_samples,
position = ggplot2::position_jitter(
width = 0.1
)
) +
ggplot2::theme(
legend.position = "none"
) +
OlinkAnalyze::set_plot_theme() +
ggplot2::facet_wrap(
facets = ggplot2::vars(.data[["Assay_OID"]]),
nrow = 1L,
ncol = 1L
)Figure 6. Violin plot of CHL1 in both datasets prior to bridging. Bridge samples are indicated by black points.
Another way to determine if bridging decreased variability between projects is to calculate the coefficient of variation (CV) of the control samples across both projects before and after bridging, as shown in Figure 7. The CV after normalization is expected to be smaller than the CV prior to normalization.
Note that the CV calculation formula differs between Olink qPCR and Olink NGS products. More information of CV calculation can be found in the Olink FAQ.
# Olink NGS products CV calculation formula
ngs_cv <- function(npx, na_rm = FALSE) {
sqrt(exp((log(2) * sd(npx, na.rm = na_rm)) ^ 2) - 1) * 100
}
# Olink qPCR products CV calculation formula
qpcr_cv <- function(npx, na_rm = TRUE) {
100 * sd(2 ^ npx) / mean(2 ^ npx)
}
tech <- "qPCR"
# Calculate CV for control samples across projects before bridging
cv_before <- npx_df |>
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL*."
)
) |>
dplyr::filter(
.data[["NPX"]] > .data[["LOD"]]
) |>
dplyr::group_by(
.data[["OlinkID"]]
) |>
dplyr::mutate(
CV = dplyr::if_else(
.env[["tech"]] == "NGS",
ngs_cv(npx = .data[["NPX"]]),
qpcr_cv(npx = .data[["NPX"]])
)
) |>
dplyr::ungroup() |>
dplyr::distinct(
.data[["OlinkID"]], .data[["CV"]]
)
# Calculate CV for control samples across projects after bridging
cv_after <- npx_df_br |>
dplyr::filter(
stringr::str_detect(
string = .data[["SampleID"]],
pattern = "CONTROL*."
)
) |>
dplyr::filter(
.data[["NPX"]] > .data[["LOD"]]
) |>
dplyr::group_by(
.data[["OlinkID"]]
) |>
dplyr::mutate(
CV = dplyr::if_else(
.env[["tech"]] == "NGS",
ngs_cv(npx = .data[["NPX"]]),
qpcr_cv(npx = .data[["NPX"]])
)
) |>
dplyr::ungroup() |>
dplyr::distinct(
.data[["OlinkID"]], .data[["CV"]]
)
# Plot distribution of CV before and after bridging
cv_before |>
dplyr::mutate(
Analysis = "Before"
) |>
dplyr::bind_rows(
cv_after |>
dplyr::mutate(
Analysis = "After"
)
) |>
ggplot2::ggplot(
mapping = ggplot2::aes(
x = .data[["CV"]],
fill = .data[["Analysis"]]
)
) +
ggplot2::geom_density(
alpha = 0.7
) +
OlinkAnalyze::set_plot_theme() +
OlinkAnalyze::olink_fill_discrete() +
ggplot2::theme(
text = ggplot2::element_text(
size = 20L
)
) +
ggplot2::xlim(-50L, 400L)Figure 7. Density plot of inter-project CV before and after bridging.
Finally, use PCA plot to check whether bridging has effect in correcting batch effects (Figure 8). In the example below, it is clear that before bridge samples from data 1 and 2 are divided into separate clusters due to the batch effects (Figure 3), but after bridging they are shown as one cluster in the PCA plot (Figure 8). Bridging has sufficiently removed the batch effects between two data sets.
if (requireNamespace(package = "ggpubr", quietly = TRUE)) {
# PCA plot
OlinkAnalyze::olink_pca_plot(
df = npx_df_br_no_ctrl,
color_g = "Type",
byPanel = TRUE,
check_log = check_log_npx_df_br_no_ctrl
)
}Figure 8. PCA plot of both datasets after bridging.
Normalized data in long format can be exported using the
write.table() function. Note that 2 columns are added
during the bridging process, so to have the export format match the
input format, the columns “Project” and “Adj_factor” need to be removed.
To export exclusively the non-reference project, the
dplyr::filter() function can be used.
We are always happy to help. Email us with any questions:
biostat@olink.com for statistical services and general stats questions
support@olink.com for Olink lab product and technical support
info@olink.com for more information
© 2026 Olink Proteomics AB, part of Thermo Fisher Scientific.
Olink products and services are For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
All information in this document is subject to change without notice. This document is not intended to convey any warranties, representations and/or recommendations of any kind, unless such warranties, representations and/or recommendations are explicitly stated.
Olink assumes no liability arising from a prospective reader’s actions based on this document.
OLINK, NPX, PEA, PROXIMITY EXTENSION, INSIGHT and the Olink logotype are trademarks registered, or pending registration, by Olink Proteomics AB. All third-party trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Olink products and assay methods are covered by several patents and patent applications https://www.olink.com/patents/.