Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • andrewelamb
    Junior Member
    • Dec 2015
    • 4

    eEtting up DESeq 2 analysis

    I have some RNA-seq data I'm trying to do DESeq2 analysis on, and it's more complicated than what I've done before.

    Patients came in two different times and had their blood drawn and sequenced. There is some missing data, so that some patients only have data for visit 1 or 2. In between visits patients were given either a placebo or one of two treatments.

    The answer we're trying to answer is what expression levels changed in between visits in a different way between the treatment groups. Based on the vignettes and other answered questions it seems the design would be:

    ~ patient + visit + treatment + visit:treatment

    the interaction visit:treatment would be the 'difference in differences' of each treatment over the time between visits. Is this correct?
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    You can simply exclude the patients for whom you only have a single sample. They'll get ignored in the analysis anyway. Anyway, yes your model is correct and you do indeed care most about the "visit:treatment" term.

    Comment

    • andrewelamb
      Junior Member
      • Dec 2015
      • 4

      #3
      Thanks for the answer!

      I did get this error however:

      Error in checkFullRank(modelMatrix) :
      the model matrix is not full rank, so the model cannot be fit as specified.
      One or more variables or interaction terms in the design formula are linear
      combinations of the others and must be removed.

      my pheno file looks like:

      sampleName visit condition patient
      1 V2 control 1
      2 V5 control 1
      3 V2 treatment 2
      4 V5 treatment 2
      5 V5 treatment 3
      6 V2 treatment 3
      7 V5 treatment 4
      8 V2 treatment 4
      9 V2 control 5
      10 V5 control 5

      Removing patients from the experimental design worked. Is there any way, or value, to preserve the patient data?

      Comment

      • dpryan
        Devon Ryan
        • Jul 2011
        • 3478

        #4
        Indeed, I should have foreseen that :P

        If you were to instead use "~patient+condition:visit+visit" and got rid of the "conditiontreatment:visitV2" column in the model matrix then the result would work. The original problem was that each condition is comprised of a set of patients, so you can't have patient coefficients and a "condition" coefficient (which is just the average of the patient coefficients!).

        Sorry that that's so confusing.
        Last edited by dpryan; 12-16-2015, 06:34 AM.

        Comment

        • andrewelamb
          Junior Member
          • Dec 2015
          • 4

          #5
          Thank you for the help!

          I apologize, I'm not entirely clear on how to set up my model matrix based on your answer. It seems I would still need every column if I were to use "~patient+condition:visit+visit".

          Comment

          • dpryan
            Devon Ryan
            • Jul 2011
            • 3478

            #6
            I had a typo in my reply, I meant to remove the "conditiontreatment:visitV2" from the model matrix. That'll make it full rank,

            Comment

            • andrewelamb
              Junior Member
              • Dec 2015
              • 4

              #7
              Ahh I see, I'm getting my sample table and the model matrix confused.

              So is this the correct way to use my own model matrix?

              design_string <- "~patient+condition:visit+visit"
              sample_table <- read.table(input_file, row.names = NULL, header = T, sep = ",")
              deseq_object <- DESeqDataSetFromHTSeqCount(sampleTable = sample_table,
              design = ~condition, #have to have something here
              directory = count_folder)
              mm <- model.matrix(as.formula(design_string), sample_table)
              mm <- mm[,-19] # gets rid of conditiontreatment:visitV2
              deseq_object <- DESeq(deseq_object, full=mm, betaPrior=FALSE)

              Comment

              • dpryan
                Devon Ryan
                • Jul 2011
                • 3478

                #8
                Something along those lines at least.

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • SEQadmin2
                  Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                  by SEQadmin2


                  Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                  The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                  ...
                  07-20-2026, 11:48 AM
                • SEQadmin2
                  Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
                  by SEQadmin2



                  Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
                  ...
                  07-09-2026, 11:10 AM
                • 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...
                  07-08-2026, 05:17 AM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-20-2026, 11:10 AM
                0 responses
                14 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-13-2026, 10:26 AM
                0 responses
                32 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
                0 responses
                43 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
                0 responses
                29 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...