Abstract

BackgroundHigh-throughput RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has evolved as an important analytical tool in molecular biology. Although the utility and importance of this technique have grown, uncertainties regarding the proper analysis of RNA-seq data remain. Of primary concern, there is no consensus regarding which normalization and statistical methods are the most appropriate for analyzing this data. The lack of standardized analytical methods leads to uncertainties in data interpretation and study reproducibility, especially with studies reporting high false discovery rates. In this study, we compared a recently developed normalization method, UQ-pgQ2, with three of the most frequently used alternatives including RLE (relative log estimate), TMM (Trimmed-mean M values) and UQ (upper quartile normalization) in the analysis of RNA-seq data. We evaluated the performance of these methods for gene-level differential expression analysis by considering the factors, including: 1) normalization combined with the choice of a Wald test from DESeq2 and an exact test/QL (Quasi-likelihood) F-Test from edgeR; 2) sample sizes in two balanced two-group comparisons; and 3) sequencing read depths.ResultsUsing the MAQC RNA-seq datasets with small sample replicates, we found that UQ-pgQ2 normalization combined with an exact test can achieve better performance in term of power and specificity in differential gene expression analysis. However, using an intra-group analysis of false positives from real and simulated data, we found that a Wald test performs better than an exact test when the number of sample replicates is large and that a QL F-test performs the best given sample sizes of 5, 10 and 15 for any normalization. The RLE, TMM and UQ methods performed similarly given a desired sample size.ConclusionWe found the UQ-pgQ2 method combined with an exact test/QL F-test is the best choice in order to control false positives when the sample size is small. When the sample size is large, UQ-pgQ2 with a QL F-test is a better choice for the type I error control in an intra-group analysis. We observed read depths have a minimal impact for differential gene expression analysis based on the simulated data.

Highlights

  • High-throughput RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has evolved as an important analytical tool in molecular biology

  • We found that UQ-pgQ2 normalization combined with an exact test from edegR performed slightly better than Trimmed-mean M (TMM) and Relative log estimate (RLE) in terms of false discovery rate (FDR) when using Microarray quality control project (MAQC) data and simulated data

  • Statistical analysis of MAQC2 and MAQC3 for the combined methods In our previous study, we evaluated the effect of normalization methods including DESeq, TMM, UQpgQ2 and UQ based on differentially expressed genes (DEGs) analysis using two MAQC datasets and an exact test/edgeR

Read more

Summary

Introduction

High-throughput RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has evolved as an important analytical tool in molecular biology. We evaluated the performance of these methods for gene-level differential expression analysis by considering the factors, including: 1) normalization combined with the choice of a Wald test from DESeq and an exact test/QL (Quasi-likelihood) F-Test from edgeR; 2) sample sizes in two balanced two-group comparisons; and 3) sequencing read depths. High-through RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has been increasingly used in the studies of genomics and transcriptomics over the last decade [1, 2]. Recent clinical studies demonstrated the utility of RNA-seq in identifying complex disease signatures via transcriptome analysis [8, 9]. Despite this utility and importance, optimal methods for analyzing RNA-seq data remain uncertain. Normalization and proper test statistics are critical steps in the analysis of RNA-seq data [15]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.