Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jvanleuven
    Member
    • Nov 2011
    • 23

    Inconsistent gene lists: DESeq2, EdgeR, CuffDiff, and homemade glm

    Hello,
    In an effort to get a reliable list of DEGs, I ran CuffDiff, EdgeR, and DESeq2. I though I would grab the overlapping genes and be good to go. However, the DEG lists outputted by each were quite different. Because of this, we decided to also write a GLMM that would be more transparent and easy to understand. This GLMM also gave a fairly different list (with some overlap of course).

    The group I'm working with is inclined to go with the GLMM since we (the statistician in the group) knows what it is doing. My main worry is the CuffLinks, EdgeR, and DESeq2 are making some corrections to account for the biology of RNAseq data that we may not understand or incorporate into our GLM.

    What important ways do CuffLinks, EdgeR, and DESeq2 diverge from a GLM? We're using glmer.nb with offset=log(librarysize).

    Thank you,
    -James

    Details:
    We have 14 samples done in triplicates.
    Read coverage is ranges from 16-55 million 100bp PE reads per sample.
    Aligned to mm10 with Tophat in cufflinks. 83-91% reads mapped.
    Used tophat alignments with HTSeq-count to get tables for DESeq2, EdgeR, and GLMM.
    Did 7 pairwise contrasts between treatments.

    I attached a couple of images.

    The venn diagrams show the overlap in DEG lists outputted by the 4 methods for the 7 different contrasts.

    Second image shows MC plots for each contrast. X-axis is log2 of the mean htseq counts for all the genes. Y-axis is log2 fold change of treatment vs. mock.
    Attached Files
  • GenoMax
    Senior Member
    • Feb 2008
    • 7142

    #2
    This is not an unheard of problem. There have been papers comparing different methods for DE and the results they produce. Here is one of them. There is at least one more that I remember but can't find at the moment.
    Last edited by GenoMax; 10-12-2017, 04:31 PM.

    Comment

    • jvanleuven
      Member
      • Nov 2011
      • 23

      #3
      Thank you for the paper. Below are several more that address the issue.
      I'm still not sure if we should pick a method or use some agglomeration of them.

      Seyednasrollah F, Laiho A, Elo LL. 2015. Comparison of software packages for detecting differential expression in RNA-seq studies. Brief Bioinform. 16:59–70. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbt086.

      Zhang ZH et al. 2014. A Comparative Study of Techniques for Differential Expression Analysis on RNA-Seq Data. PLOS ONE. 9:e103207. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103207.

      Rapaport F et al. 2013. Comprehensive evaluation of differential gene expression analysis methods for RNA-seq data. Genome Biology. 14:R95. doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-9-r95.

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • SEQadmin2
        Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
        by SEQadmin2



        Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

        There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
        Today, 05:17 AM
      • GATTACAT
        Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by GATTACAT
        Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
        07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
      • SEQadmin2
        Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by SEQadmin2


        I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

        Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
        06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 10:08 AM
      0 responses
      6 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:05 AM
      0 responses
      8 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
      0 responses
      31 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
      0 responses
      29 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...