Thank you so much!!!
Hello,
I am performing a differential gene expression analysis and would appreciate some advice regarding the appropriate design formula.
Our goal is to identify genes that are differentially expressed between two conditions: pre-disease and disease. We have samples from 6 patients who were followed longitudinally, with sequential biopsies/hysterectomies collected over time as disease progression was monitored. Each patient has approximately 3–5 biopsies in the pre-disease state and 3–5 biopsies in the disease state.
A simplified version of the metadata is shown below:
| sample | patient | biopsy | condition |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | P1 | B1 | pre |
| S2 | P1 | B2 | pre |
| S3 | P1 | B3 | pre |
| S4 | P1 | B4 | disease |
| S5 | P1 | B5 | disease |
| S6 | P1 | B6 | disease |
| S7 | P1 | B7 | disease |
| S8 | P1 | B8 | disease |
... and similarly for the remaining patients.
My question is whether it would be appropriate to test for differential expression between pre-disease and disease while accounting for patient-to-patient variation and sample type variation (PCA shows the biggest sample separation based on sample type)? In DESeq2, I was considering the design:
design = ~ patient + sample_type + condition
In addition, one patient only has pre-disease samples and no disease samples. Would it be advisable to include this patient in the analysis, or would it be better to exclude them?
Finally, I am wondering whether a single model including all patients is preferable, or whether it would be more appropriate to perform differential expression analysis separately for each patient (pre-disease vs. disease) and then look for overlapping genes across patients.
I would be very grateful for any guidance or suggestions.
Thank you very much for your help!!
1 answer
My question is whether it would be appropriate to test for differential expression between pre-disease and disease while accounting for patient-to-patient variation and sample type variation (PCA shows the biggest sample separation based on sample type)?
Yes, the pairing is appropriate and basically the most powerful analysis as it analyzes per-patient, therefore eliminating potential confounders compared to comparing across patients, such as age, sex, bmi and all sorts of clinical and phenotypic confounders.
In addition, one patient only has pre-disease samples and no disease samples. Would it be advisable to include this patient in the analysis, or would it be better to exclude them?
For the paired analysis you would exclude this one, especially if the question is the longitudonal development.
Finally, I am wondering whether a single model including all patients is preferable, or whether it would be more appropriate to perform differential expression analysis separately for each patient (pre-disease vs. disease) and then look for overlapping genes across patients.
Include all patients (that are paired). You still need biological replication (=many patients) to ensure that your findings are not per-patient artifacts and hold true across a cohort.
Log in to answer this question.