  Motivation: Illumina BeadArray technology includes negative control features
that allow a precise estimation of the background noise. As an alternative to
the background subtraction proposed in BeadStudio which leads to an important
loss of information by generating negative values, a background correction
method modeling the observed intensities as the sum of the exponentially
distributed signal and normally distributed noise has been developed.
Nevertheless, Wang and Ye (2011) display a kernel-based estimator of the signal
distribution on Illumina BeadArrays and suggest that a gamma distribution would
represent a better modeling of the signal density. Hence, the
normal-exponential modeling may not be appropriate for Illumina data and
background corrections derived from this model may lead to wrong estimation.
Results: We propose a more flexible modeling based on a gamma distributed
signal and a normal distributed background noise and develop the associated
background correction. Our model proves to be markedly more accurate to model
Illumina BeadArrays: on the one hand, this model offers a more correct fit of
the observed intensities. On the other hand, the comparison of the operating
characteristics of several background correction procedures on spike-in and on
normal-gamma simulated data shows high similarities, reinforcing the validation
of the normal-gamma modeling. The performance of the background corrections
based on the normal-gamma and normal-exponential models are compared on two
dilution data sets. Surprisingly, we observe that the implementation of a more
accurate parametrisation in the model-based background correction does not
increase the sensitivity. These results may be explained by the operating
characteristics of the estimators: the normal-gamma background correction
offers an improvement in terms of bias, but at the cost of a loss in precision.
