Cargando…
Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies
Differential splicing (DS) is a post-transcriptional biological process with critical, wide-ranging effects on a plethora of cellular activities and disease processes. To date, a number of computational approaches have been developed to identify and quantify differentially spliced genes from RNA-seq...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711265/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbz126 |
_version_ | 1783618109414834176 |
---|---|
author | Mehmood, Arfa Laiho, Asta Venäläinen, Mikko S McGlinchey, Aidan J Wang, Ning Elo, Laura L |
author_facet | Mehmood, Arfa Laiho, Asta Venäläinen, Mikko S McGlinchey, Aidan J Wang, Ning Elo, Laura L |
author_sort | Mehmood, Arfa |
collection | PubMed |
description | Differential splicing (DS) is a post-transcriptional biological process with critical, wide-ranging effects on a plethora of cellular activities and disease processes. To date, a number of computational approaches have been developed to identify and quantify differentially spliced genes from RNA-seq data, but a comprehensive intercomparison and appraisal of these approaches is currently lacking. In this study, we systematically evaluated 10 DS analysis tools for consistency and reproducibility, precision, recall and false discovery rate, agreement upon reported differentially spliced genes and functional enrichment. The tools were selected to represent the three different methodological categories: exon-based (DEXSeq, edgeR, JunctionSeq, limma), isoform-based (cuffdiff2, DiffSplice) and event-based methods (dSpliceType, MAJIQ, rMATS, SUPPA). Overall, all the exon-based methods and two event-based methods (MAJIQ and rMATS) scored well on the selected measures. Of the 10 tools tested, the exon-based methods performed generally better than the isoform-based and event-based methods. However, overall, the different data analysis tools performed strikingly differently across different data sets or numbers of samples. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7711265 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77112652020-12-09 Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies Mehmood, Arfa Laiho, Asta Venäläinen, Mikko S McGlinchey, Aidan J Wang, Ning Elo, Laura L Brief Bioinform Review Article Differential splicing (DS) is a post-transcriptional biological process with critical, wide-ranging effects on a plethora of cellular activities and disease processes. To date, a number of computational approaches have been developed to identify and quantify differentially spliced genes from RNA-seq data, but a comprehensive intercomparison and appraisal of these approaches is currently lacking. In this study, we systematically evaluated 10 DS analysis tools for consistency and reproducibility, precision, recall and false discovery rate, agreement upon reported differentially spliced genes and functional enrichment. The tools were selected to represent the three different methodological categories: exon-based (DEXSeq, edgeR, JunctionSeq, limma), isoform-based (cuffdiff2, DiffSplice) and event-based methods (dSpliceType, MAJIQ, rMATS, SUPPA). Overall, all the exon-based methods and two event-based methods (MAJIQ and rMATS) scored well on the selected measures. Of the 10 tools tested, the exon-based methods performed generally better than the isoform-based and event-based methods. However, overall, the different data analysis tools performed strikingly differently across different data sets or numbers of samples. Oxford University Press 2019-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7711265/ /pubmed/31802105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbz126 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Mehmood, Arfa Laiho, Asta Venäläinen, Mikko S McGlinchey, Aidan J Wang, Ning Elo, Laura L Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title | Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title_full | Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title_fullStr | Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title_short | Systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for RNA-seq studies |
title_sort | systematic evaluation of differential splicing tools for rna-seq studies |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711265/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbz126 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mehmoodarfa systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies AT laihoasta systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies AT venalainenmikkos systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies AT mcglincheyaidanj systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies AT wangning systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies AT elolaural systematicevaluationofdifferentialsplicingtoolsforrnaseqstudies |