overdispersion and biological replicates

shilez · 08-26-2011, 11:34 AM

Hello,

I really appreciate the work of DESeq and EdgeR for taking the overdispersion into account for biological replicates. However assuming when analyzing tumor samples in a few cancer subgroups, do samples in the same subgroup count as "biological replicates" too? Particularly does the overdispersion model in DESeq statistically sound for a potential more variable samples within a subgroup?

Simon Anders · 08-29-2011, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shilez

However assuming when analyzing tumor samples in a few cancer subgroups, do samples in the same subgroup count as "biological replicates" too?

Of course.

Quote:

Particularly does the overdispersion model in DESeq statistically sound for a potential more variable samples within a subgroup?

Yes. (Please have a look at the development version, as we made quite some changes.)

This is not to say, however, that you are likely to find much if you compare cancer subgroups and have only a few samples per group. Precisely because the variation is so large you need very many samples to have enough power to find significant differences. Furthermore, pairing samples with normal tissue from the same patient (and using GLMs for the analysis) reduces the variability.

See also this thread: http://seqanswers.com/forums/archive...p/t-11133.html

shilez · 08-29-2011, 08:03 AM

Thanks a lot Simon!
My sample size is 10/subgroup without the normal tissue sequenced from the same individual.

My primary goal is gene expression analysis and transcript expression analysis.
I haven't decided on SNP detection, and fusion gene analysis. Do you think 50bp single read would not be powerful enough to get meaningful results?

Simon Anders · 08-29-2011, 08:43 AM

I also realized after posting that the thread I mention talks about SNPs, not gene expression, but the problems are similar.

50bp single-end is definitely sufficient to get good expression values.

I don't know that much about cancer transcriptomics, but 10 samples sounds like a quite small number to me, especially without matched normal tissue, unless the expression differences between your sub-types are quite pronounced. Better have a good look at the literature (also look at microarray studies, the power issues should be quite similar) to see what sample sizes gave good results in the past.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Biological replicates with cuffdiff, cummeRbund	turnersd	Bioinformatics	15	11-19-2012 06:59 AM
using Cuffdiff with biological replicates	Jane M	RNA Sequencing	0	09-01-2011 01:42 AM
overdispersion and biological replicates	shilez	RNA Sequencing	0	08-25-2011 07:10 PM
cuffdiff with biological replicates	PFS	Bioinformatics	1	06-14-2011 07:51 PM
Inconsistency between biological replicates	Nicholas_	Bioinformatics	1	04-06-2011 04:18 AM

08-26-2011, 11:34 AM	#1
shilez Member Location: Rockville, MD Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 10	overdispersion and biological replicates Hello, I really appreciate the work of DESeq and EdgeR for taking the overdispersion into account for biological replicates. However assuming when analyzing tumor samples in a few cancer subgroups, do samples in the same subgroup count as "biological replicates" too? Particularly does the overdispersion model in DESeq statistically sound for a potential more variable samples within a subgroup?

08-29-2011, 08:03 AM	#3
shilez Member Location: Rockville, MD Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 10	Thanks a lot Simon! My sample size is 10/subgroup without the normal tissue sequenced from the same individual. My primary goal is gene expression analysis and transcript expression analysis. I haven't decided on SNP detection, and fusion gene analysis. Do you think 50bp single read would not be powerful enough to get meaningful results?

08-29-2011, 08:43 AM	#4
Simon Anders Senior Member Location: Heidelberg, Germany Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 994	I also realized after posting that the thread I mention talks about SNPs, not gene expression, but the problems are similar. 50bp single-end is definitely sufficient to get good expression values. I don't know that much about cancer transcriptomics, but 10 samples sounds like a quite small number to me, especially without matched normal tissue, unless the expression differences between your sub-types are quite pronounced. Better have a good look at the literature (also look at microarray studies, the power issues should be quite similar) to see what sample sizes gave good results in the past.