Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • illinu
    Member
    • Jul 2013
    • 55

    #1

    multifactor analysis or pairwise comparison?

    I can't find a simple answer to what's the difference between doing multifactor analysis or pairwise comparisons, example:

    I have two factors to consider: condition (treatment or control) and genotype (A and B). If I do
    1. a pairwise comparison between control and treatment across both genotypes and
    2. a pairwise comparison between treatment and control in genotype A and treatment and control in genotype B
    I expect the intersection of these two pairwise comparisons to give the same results as if I do mutlifactor analysis taking into account both factors: condition and genotype (in DESeq2 something like design(ddsM) <- formula(~condition*genotype)) but I don't

    What's in this case the biological interpretation of both analyses?
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    Your wording is a little confused so it's hard to tell exactly what you're doing in method (1) and (2). How about you just tell us the biological question you want to answer and then one of us can then just tell you the simplest way to do it.

    In general, you can get the same answer treating each condition:genotype combination as a separate group and doing comparisons as if you use a more classical factorial design (e.g., "~condition*genotype"). Some questions are simpler to answer with one design vs. the other.

    I would strongly encourage you not to do multiple comparisons and then take the intersection of the results. You're absolutely killing your statistical power when you're doing that. You also then lack a fold-change or p-value, which you kind of need to both publishing and follow-up experiments.

    Comment

    • illinu
      Member
      • Jul 2013
      • 55

      #3
      My biological question is how do genotype A and B respond differently to the treatment. I need to take both factors into account. I wan't to know what's the difference between doing multifactor (condition*genotype) or treat vs control in A and treat vs ctl in B and compare the list of genes. Basically if I do the latter I get more genes differentially expressed than in the former.

      How do I interepret biologically the results of the two approaches?

      Comment

      • dpryan
        Devon Ryan
        • Jul 2011
        • 3478

        #4
        You'll want to use the ~condition*genotype model and extract the interaction term from it. That will directly address your question. The second method is statistically invalid and not answering any biological question.

        Comment

        • illinu
          Member
          • Jul 2013
          • 55

          #5
          Thank you, I would like to know why the second option is statistically incorrect.

          And for sanity could you or someone confirm that this is the correct code in R (DESeq2 package):

          Code:
          countData=read.table(file.choose(),header=TRUE,row.names=1,sep="\t")
          condition=rep(rep(c("Ctr","Treat"),each=3),4)
          genotype=rep(rep(c("A","B"),each=6),2)
          colData=data.frame(condition,genotype,row.names=names(countData))
          dds <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData = countData,colData = colData,design = ~ condition+genotype)
          ddsM=dds
          design(ddsM) <- formula(~condition*genotype)
          ddsM <- DESeq(ddsM)
          resM <- results(ddsM)
          ddsMN=ddsM
          ddsMN = estimateSizeFactors(ddsM)
          ddsMN = estimateDispersions(ddsM)
          resGenotype=nbinomLRT(ddsMN, full = design(ddsM), reduced =  formula(~condition*genotype), maxit = 1000)
          resGenotype <- results(resMTolFact, contrast=c("genotype","A","B"))

          Comment

          • dpryan
            Devon Ryan
            • Jul 2011
            • 3478

            #6
            By intersecting lists you're not measuring anything, just asking, "if I take two sets of results and intersect them, what do I get?" That's not answering the question, "what's the additional effect of condition on genotype B?".

            Regarding the code, you can skip the LRT stuff and just use "results(ddsM)" and specify the interaction coefficient. For the actual LRT test, you're using the same formula for the full and reduced design. You want just "reduced = ~condition+genotype". "resMTolFact" is never defined. You can skip all of the "ddsMN" definition stuff.

            Comment

            • illinu
              Member
              • Jul 2013
              • 55

              #7
              Hi Devon,

              Thank you for replying. If I understand correct I should avoid the LRT test? I could use the interaction term like so:
              resGenotype <- results(ddsM, contrast=list("conditionTreat.genotypeB")) ??

              This arises a new question, if I define my conditions variable as:

              Code:
               condition=rep(rep(c("A.ctl","A.treat","B.ctl","B.treat"),each=3),2)
              To the question, how do A and B respond differently to the treatment could also be answered like this?

              Code:
              AB <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData = countData,colData = colDataAB, design = ~ condition)
              ABpairwise <- DESeq(AB)
              resAB <- results(ABpairwise, contrast = c("condition", "A.treat", "B.treat"))

              Comment

              • dpryan
                Devon Ryan
                • Jul 2011
                • 3478

                #8
                Code:
                results(ABpairwise, contrast=c(1, -1, -1, 1))
                You want the additional effect due to the interaction of treatment and genotype B. In other words, you need to take B.treat - B.ctl - (A.treat - A.ctl) (represented by a vector of "1, -1, -1, 1").

                Regarding the LRT, you can do that too, but you'd need to be a bit more comfortable with what that's actually testing.

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • SEQadmin2
                  Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
                  by SEQadmin2



                  Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

                  Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
                  ...
                  10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
                • SEQadmin2
                  New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
                  by SEQadmin2


                  Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

                  We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
                  ...
                  09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:13 AM
                0 responses
                16 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 10:48 AM
                0 responses
                17 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
                0 responses
                35 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
                0 responses
                42 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...