Differential gene expression analysis tools exhibit substandard performance for long non-coding RNA-sequencing data
Alemu Takele AssefaiD, Katrijn De Paepe, Celine EveraertiD, Pieter MestdaghiD, Olivier ThasiD, Jo VandesompeleiD
Abstract
BackgroundProtein-coding RNAs (mRNA) have been the primary target of most transcriptome studies in the past, but in recent years, attention has expanded to include long non-coding RNAs (lncRNA). lncRNAs are typically expressed at low levels, and are inherently highly variable. This is a fundamental challenge for differential expression (DE) analysis. In this study, the performance of 14 popular tools for testing DE in RNA-seq data along with their normalization methods is comprehensively evaluated, with a particular focus on lncRNAs and low abundant mRNAs.\n\nResultsThirteen performance metrics were used to evaluate DE tools and normalization methods using simulations and analyses of six diverse RNA-seq datasets. Non-parametric procedures are used to simulate gene expression data in such a way that realistic levels of expression and variability are preserved in the simulated data. Throughout the assessment, we kept track of the results for mRNA and lncRNA separately. All statistical models exhibited inferior performance for lncRNAs compared to mRNAs across all simulated scenarios and analysis of benchmark RNA-seq datasets. No single tool uniformly outperformed the others.\n\nConclusionOverall, the linear modeling with empirical Bayes moderation (limma) and the nonparametric approach (SAMSeq) showed best performance: good control of the false discovery rate (FDR) and reasonable sensitivity. However, for achieving a sensitivity of at least 50%, more than 80 samples are required when studying expression levels in a realistic clinical settings such as in cancer research. About half of the methods showed severe excess of false discoveries, making these methods unreliable for differential expression analysis and jeopardizing reproducible science. The detailed results of our study can be consulted through a user-friendly web application, http://statapps.ugent.be/tools/AppDGE/
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 57
- FWCI
- 2.76
- Field percentile
- top 8%
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- lncDIFF: a novel distribution-free method for differential expression analysis of long non-coding RNA
Qian Li, Xiaoqing Yu, … Xuefeng Wang·BMC GenomicsPeer-reviewed·Jul 2, 2019
- An evaluation of RNA-seq differential analysis methods
Dongmei Li, Martin Stuart Zand, … Zidian Xie·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Sep 16, 2022
- Benchmark of lncRNA Quantification for RNA-Seq of Cancer Samples
Hong Zheng, Kevin Brennan, … Olivier Gevaert·GigaSciencePeer-reviewed·Dec 1, 2019
- A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data
Zong Hong Zhang, Dhanisha J. Jhaveri, … Qiongyi Zhao·bioRxiv·May 28, 2014
- A relative comparison between Hidden Markov- and Log-Linear- based models for differential expression analysis in a real time course RNA sequencing data
Fatemeh Gholizadeh, Zahra Salehi, … Kaveh Kavousi·bioRxiv·Oct 22, 2018
- RNA-seq analyses: Benchmarking differential expression analyses tools reveals the effect of higher number of replicates on performance.
Samson Pandam Salifu, Hannah Nyarkoah Nyarko, … Abdul-Rahman Adamu Bukari·bioRxiv·Jun 10, 2020