Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Dear mikep and mbblack

    Thank you so much for your comments.
    I have one more quick question. I tried to analyze my data to find DEG in two condition. I have used edgeR, DESeq, DESeq2, cuffdiff or just simple wilconxon rank sum test etc.
    However, I could not find any DEG with adjusted p value in any of these methods..
    TOO UPSET

    There are two hypothesis.
    1) Hypothesis 1

    Maybe, our experimental design is wrong so we could not detect any significant gene at all.. That is the reason we could not identify any DEG gene.. (End of story..) we could not do anything !!!
    ( I hope it is not !! cause there should be some genes responsing our drug)

    2) Hypothesis 2

    In some reason(small sample, so little statistical power), we could not find statistically significant DEG genes with adjusted p-value. (Still we could find some DEGs with p value) even though there exist DEG genes responsing the drug.

    ==============================================

    In this case, what option I can choose?
    I could not just throw away our data. I would like to find meaningful output........

    So, I am thinking that (based on your suggestion)

    Just use the pvalue to detect DEG genes and do any additional analysis with these DEG gene based on pvalue.. and then if we filter some more meaningful DEG among previously detected DEG genes,we can validate with experimental validation. (qPCR etc I am not sure how it would be feasible because of lack of money! ) ...
    Or is there any other way we can claim our result without experimental validation??? Any suggestion??

    Or Experiemnental validation is the only way I can do??

    Comment


    • #17
      Did you try the design <- model.matrix(~drug+patientID) mentioned by mikep?

      In many (perhaps most) of the analyses I have done of patient RNA-seq data, there are no differentially expressed genes found if you only look at the treatment/condition without telling the software to perform a paired analysis (specifying the patient ID in the design formula is one way of doing so). The reason being, as mbblack and mikep have already said, that the biological variation between individuals is obscuring the treatment effect.

      Comment


      • #18
        That is unfortunate. You are however correct, further validation is absolutely required.

        I have a question, how many genes pass uncorrected pv 0.05 and what is the range of the fold change you see?

        EDIT: good point kopi-o, I assumed the "two condition" comment meant 2 factor, but it may not.
        Last edited by mikep; 08-18-2014, 01:26 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Dear Kopi-o and mikep

          Thank you for your comments!!
          Here is the specific analysis result I have done!

          I have 12 samples from 6 patients with pre- and post- drug treatment.

          For my data format

          patient drug
          KYM_pre 1 pre
          KYM_post 1 post
          GDY_pre 2 pre
          GDY_post 2 post
          HKS_pre 3 pre
          HKS_post 3 post
          KWK_pre 4 pre
          KWK_post 4 post
          PYM_pre 5 pre
          PYM_post 5 post
          SHM_pre 6 pre
          SHM_post 6 post
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          For EdgeR

          design <- model.matrix(~patient+drug)
          data_e <- DGEList(counts=f_data)
          data_e <- calcNormFactors(data_e)
          data_e <- estimateGLMCommonDisp(data_e, design)
          data_e <- estimateGLMTrendedDisp(data_e, design)
          data_e <- estimateGLMTagwiseDisp(data_e, design)
          ## Fit the model, testing the coefficient for the treated vs untreated comparison
          data_efit <- glmFit(data_e, design)
          data_efit <- glmLRT(data_efit, coef="drugpost")
          topTags(data_efit)

          In this EdgeR analysis I got still only 125(16) DEG based on p value threshold 0.05 (pvalue threshold < 0.01) (no DEG based on adjusted p value)

          ==============================================

          For DESeq

          ---------------------------------------------------------------------

          meta <- data.frame(row.names=colnames(data), patient = patient, drug = drug)
          d_fa <- newCountDataSet(data, meta)
          d_fa <- estimateSizeFactors(d_fa)


          d_fa <- estimateDispersions(d_fa, method="blind", sharingMode="fit-only")
          (Is it okay??)
          dh_fit1 = fitNbinomGLMs(d_fa, count ~ patient + enzyme)
          dh_fit0 = fitNbinomGLMs(d_fa, count ~ patient)
          str(dh_fit1)
          dh_pvalsGLM = nbinomGLMTest( dh_fit1, dh_fit0 )
          dh_padjGLM = p.adjust( dh_pvalsGLM, method="BH" )


          dh_dtable <- transform(dh_fit1, pval=dh_pvalsGLM, padj=dh_padjGLM)
          dh_dtable <- dh_dtable[order(dh_dtable$pval), ]

          In this DESeq analysis , I only got 52(8) DEG gene based on p value threshold 0.05(pvalue < 0.01) (No DEG based on adjusted p values)..

          And among those 125(16), 52(8) DEG genes from EdgeR, DESeq with p value threshold 0.05 (0.01 respectively) ..

          In adddition, about the FC ratio, I got range of logFC value -2.7 to 2.7 for EdgeR.
          DeSEq does not return FC ratio... so I am not sure how I can report FC value..


          I assume that edgeR model and DEseq model should test the same thing... e.g. effect of drug considering the patient effect (paired analysis..) but it seems that reported DEG gene list looks halfly overlapped... though..

          Anyhow, what do you think about this result?? Does it make sense??

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • seqadmin
            Strategies for Sequencing Challenging Samples
            by seqadmin


            Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...
            03-22-2024, 06:39 AM
          • seqadmin
            Techniques and Challenges in Conservation Genomics
            by seqadmin



            The field of conservation genomics centers on applying genomics technologies in support of conservation efforts and the preservation of biodiversity. This article features interviews with two researchers who showcase their innovative work and highlight the current state and future of conservation genomics.

            Avian Conservation
            Matthew DeSaix, a recent doctoral graduate from Kristen Ruegg’s lab at The University of Colorado, shared that most of his research...
            03-08-2024, 10:41 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:37 PM
          0 responses
          7 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:07 PM
          0 responses
          7 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-22-2024, 10:03 AM
          0 responses
          49 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-21-2024, 07:32 AM
          0 responses
          66 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Working...
          X