Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

A comparison of methods accounting for batch effects in differential expression analysis of UMI count based single cell RNA sequencing.

Wenan Chen | Silu Zhang | Justin Williams | Bensheng Ju | Bridget Shaner | John Easton | Gang Wu | Xiang Chen
Computational and structural biotechnology journal | 2020

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.

Pubmed ID: 32322368

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

  • Agency: NCI NIH HHS, United States
    Id: P30 CA021765

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


ComBat (tool)

RRID:SCR_010974

Adjusting batch effects in microarray expression data using Empirical Bayes methods.

View all literature mentions

edgeR (tool)

RRID:SCR_012802

Bioconductor software package for Empirical analysis of Digital Gene Expression data in R. Used for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq and digital gene expression data with biological replication.

View all literature mentions