4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

PROPER: comprehensive power evaluation for differential expression using RNA-seq

Journal

BIOINFORMATICS
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages 233-241

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu640

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000454]
  2. National Science Foundation [DBI1054905]
  3. National Institutes of Health [R01 GM067862]
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences
  5. Div Of Biological Infrastructure [1054905] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Motivation: RNA-seq has become a routine technique in differential expression (DE) identification. Scientists face a number of experimental design decisions, including the sample size. The power for detecting differential expression is affected by several factors, including the fraction of DE genes, distribution of the magnitude of DE, distribution of gene expression level, sequencing coverage and the choice of type I error control. The complexity and flexibility of RNA-seq experiments, the high-throughput nature of transcriptome-wide expression measurements and the unique characteristics of RNA-seq data make the power assessment particularly challenging. Results: We propose prospective power assessment instead of a direct sample size calculation by making assumptions on all of these factors. Our power assessment tool includes two components: (i) a semi-parametric simulation that generates data based on actual RNA-seq experiments with flexible choices on baseline expressions, biological variations and patterns of DE; and (ii) a power assessment component that provides a comprehensive view of power. We introduce the concepts of stratified power and false discovery cost, and demonstrate the usefulness of our method in experimental design (such as sample size and sequencing depth), as well as analysis plan (gene filtering).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available