Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NitaC
    Member
    • Apr 2013
    • 17

    grouped vs pairwise comparison for DE analysis

    I hope this really doesn't come across as a dumb question (newbie alert) but I have a question that has really been bugging me.

    To make a long story short, we determined differentially expressed genes using Cuffdiff. The conclusion for one of the comparisons doesn't exactly jive with what's accepted so we keep revisiting the issue. The terms "grouped" and "pairwise" keep coming up. Our in-house statistician prefers the grouped results but other colleagues say to use pairwise. Basically we have 8 eyes. And we're doing some comparisons between tissues. So for the grouped comparison, we take all the read counts for condition 1 in all eyes and compare it to condition 2 in all the eyes. Now, the suggestion is to compare condition 1 to condition 2 in each eye separately. And THEN somehow find a combined p-value. Another team member is using Cuffdiff and apparently there is an easy way to do this. I, however, have been using NOISeq, edgeR, and DESeq. I had grown particularly fond of NOISeq. However, to me, it just doesn't make sense to do these individual pairwise comparisons. At least for NOISeq, which performs better with biological replicates. Am I understanding something incorrectly??? Someone please clarify this for me. What is the benefit of doing the comparisons individually? To me, it's just a lot of noise because now you're getting differences between individuals.
  • dietmar13
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 107

    #2
    logic question, easy answer:

    do NOT use cuffdiff.

    as i understand you have 8 eyes with each 2 tissues (=conditions).

    use
    mapper + htseq-count and R-Packages:
    -DESeq2
    -edgeR
    -limma (voom function)
    -ShrinkBayes
    -pairedBayes

    especially the last two are very sensitive, ...

    all are able to use a matched pairs design (which is always better to use, if the data ARE matched pairs, with e.g. individuum (=eye) as random effect)

    (in my hands NOSeq and cuffdiff had the fewest significant results)

    Comment

    • NitaC
      Member
      • Apr 2013
      • 17

      #3
      Hi dietmar13!

      Thanks for your answer. My PI and statistician would be very upset to read that first line though. lol! But seriously, my teeny voice has not been enough to persuade anyone to use a different package. Still, I push on...

      The data really are matched pairs (ie. samples of both tissues taken from each eye). I will try again with one of the R packages. NOISeq and cuffdiff do indeed both have the fewest significant results. However, at least NOISeq gave me something. One of the comparisons with cuffdiff resulted in 1 DE gene...every other method suggested otherwise. Anyway, thanks again for your reply!

      -Anita

      Comment

      • chadn737
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2009
        • 392

        #4
        Both edgeR and DESeq/DESeq2 (not sure about NOISeq) allow you to include multiple factors into the experimental design. So you could give edgeR/DESeq/DESeq2 a table with condition as one factor and the eye/treatment as a second factor. Especially if each eye is of a different genotype or tissue.

        I am not fond of cuffdiff.
        Last edited by chadn737; 06-18-2013, 09:21 AM.

        Comment

        • NitaC
          Member
          • Apr 2013
          • 17

          #5
          I am reading up on how to do this with edgeR right now. Thank you chadn737.

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • seqadmin
            Pathogen Surveillance with Advanced Genomic Tools
            by seqadmin




            The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for proactive pathogen surveillance systems. As ongoing threats like avian influenza and newly emerging infections continue to pose risks, researchers are working to improve how quickly and accurately pathogens can be identified and tracked. In a recent SEQanswers webinar, two experts discussed how next-generation sequencing (NGS) and machine learning are shaping efforts to monitor viral variation and trace the origins of infectious...
            03-24-2025, 11:48 AM
          • seqadmin
            New Genomics Tools and Methods Shared at AGBT 2025
            by seqadmin


            This year’s Advances in Genome Biology and Technology (AGBT) General Meeting commemorated the 25th anniversary of the event at its original venue on Marco Island, Florida. While this year’s event didn’t include high-profile musical performances, the industry announcements and cutting-edge research still drew the attention of leading scientists.

            The Headliner
            The biggest announcement was Roche stepping back into the sequencing platform market. In the years since...
            03-03-2025, 01:39 PM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by seqadmin, 03-20-2025, 05:03 AM
          0 responses
          49 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-19-2025, 07:27 AM
          0 responses
          57 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-18-2025, 12:50 PM
          0 responses
          50 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-03-2025, 01:15 PM
          0 responses
          201 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Working...