Cargando…
A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing
Accounting for batch effects, especially latent batch effects, in differential expression (DE) analysis is critical for identifying true biological effects. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is a powerful tool for quantifying cell-to-cell variation in transcript abundance and characterizing cel...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Research Network of Computational and Structural Biotechnology
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7163294/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32322368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2020.03.026 |
_version_ | 1783523186203164672 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Wenan Zhang, Silu Williams, Justin Ju, Bensheng Shaner, Bridget Easton, John Wu, Gang Chen, Xiang |
author_facet | Chen, Wenan Zhang, Silu Williams, Justin Ju, Bensheng Shaner, Bridget Easton, John Wu, Gang Chen, Xiang |
author_sort | Chen, Wenan |
collection | PubMed |
description | Accounting for batch effects, especially latent batch effects, in differential expression (DE) analysis is critical for identifying true biological effects. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is a powerful tool for quantifying cell-to-cell variation in transcript abundance and characterizing cellular dynamics. Although many scRNA-seq DE analysis methods accommodate known batch variables, their performance has not been systematically evaluated. Moreover, the challenge of accounting for latent batch variables in scRNA-seq DE analysis is largely unmet. In contrast, many methods have been developed to account for batch variables (either known or latent) in other high-dimensional data, especially bulk RNA-seq. We extensively evaluate 11 methods for batch variables in different scRNA-seq DE analysis scenarios, with a primary focus on latent batch variables. We demonstrate that for known batch variables, incorporating them as covariates into a regression model outperformed approaches using a batch-corrected matrix. For latent batches, fixed effects models have inflated FDRs, whereas aggregation-based methods and mixed effects models have significant power loss. Surrogate variable based methods generally control the FDR well while achieving good power with small group effects. However, their performance (except that of SVA) deteriorated substantially in scenarios involving large group effects and/or group label impurity. In these settings, SVA achieves relatively good performance despite an occasionally inflated FDR (up to 0.2). Finally we make the following recommendations for scRNA-seq DE analysis: 1) incorporate known batch variables instead of using batch-corrected data; and 2) employ SVA for latent batch correction. However, better methods are still needed to fully unleash the power of scRNA-seq. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7163294 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Research Network of Computational and Structural Biotechnology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71632942020-04-22 A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing Chen, Wenan Zhang, Silu Williams, Justin Ju, Bensheng Shaner, Bridget Easton, John Wu, Gang Chen, Xiang Comput Struct Biotechnol J Research Article Accounting for batch effects, especially latent batch effects, in differential expression (DE) analysis is critical for identifying true biological effects. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is a powerful tool for quantifying cell-to-cell variation in transcript abundance and characterizing cellular dynamics. Although many scRNA-seq DE analysis methods accommodate known batch variables, their performance has not been systematically evaluated. Moreover, the challenge of accounting for latent batch variables in scRNA-seq DE analysis is largely unmet. In contrast, many methods have been developed to account for batch variables (either known or latent) in other high-dimensional data, especially bulk RNA-seq. We extensively evaluate 11 methods for batch variables in different scRNA-seq DE analysis scenarios, with a primary focus on latent batch variables. We demonstrate that for known batch variables, incorporating them as covariates into a regression model outperformed approaches using a batch-corrected matrix. For latent batches, fixed effects models have inflated FDRs, whereas aggregation-based methods and mixed effects models have significant power loss. Surrogate variable based methods generally control the FDR well while achieving good power with small group effects. However, their performance (except that of SVA) deteriorated substantially in scenarios involving large group effects and/or group label impurity. In these settings, SVA achieves relatively good performance despite an occasionally inflated FDR (up to 0.2). Finally we make the following recommendations for scRNA-seq DE analysis: 1) incorporate known batch variables instead of using batch-corrected data; and 2) employ SVA for latent batch correction. However, better methods are still needed to fully unleash the power of scRNA-seq. Research Network of Computational and Structural Biotechnology 2020-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7163294/ /pubmed/32322368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2020.03.026 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chen, Wenan Zhang, Silu Williams, Justin Ju, Bensheng Shaner, Bridget Easton, John Wu, Gang Chen, Xiang A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title | A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title_full | A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title_fullStr | A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title_short | A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing |
title_sort | comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of umi count based single cell rna sequencing |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7163294/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32322368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2020.03.026 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenwenan acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT zhangsilu acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT williamsjustin acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT jubensheng acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT shanerbridget acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT eastonjohn acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT wugang acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT chenxiang acomparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT chenwenan comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT zhangsilu comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT williamsjustin comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT jubensheng comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT shanerbridget comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT eastonjohn comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT wugang comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing AT chenxiang comparisonofmethodsaccountingforbatcheffectsindifferentialexpressionanalysisofumicountbasedsinglecellrnasequencing |