2016
DOI: 10.1101/058164
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential analysis of RNA-Seq incorporating quantification uncertainty

Abstract: We describe a novel method for the differential analysis of RNA-Seq data that utilizes bootstrapping in conjunction with response error linear modeling to decouple biological variance from inferential variance. The method is implemented in an interactive shiny app called sleuth that utilizes kallisto quantifications and bootstraps for fast and accurate analysis of RNA-Seq experiments.

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We used Kallisto (43) to perform read pseudoalignment and performed differential analysis using Sleuth (44). We fit a GLM for an isoform t in sample i: y t,i = β t,0 + βt, genotype · X t,i + β t, batch · Y t,i + t,i…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We used Kallisto (43) to perform read pseudoalignment and performed differential analysis using Sleuth (44). We fit a GLM for an isoform t in sample i: y t,i = β t,0 + βt, genotype · X t,i + β t, batch · Y t,i + t,i…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After fitting the GLM, we tested isoforms for differential expression using the built-in Wald test in Sleuth (44), which outputs a q value that has been corrected for multiple hypothesis testing.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this is apparently beyond the scope of this paper and the experimental results are in principle geared towards convincing the reader that DRIMSeq improves on existing approaches to discover changes in isoform usage, as suggested in the abstract. In my view, the experimental results do not address this question and I would suggest the authors to compare DRIMSeq with methods that also work with transcript-quantification values and assess differential isoform usage such as, for instance, Cuffdiff 3 or sleuth 4 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, the expression change in minor isoform ENST00000375512 is masked at the gene level. Therefore, ignoring transcript isoforms and counting reads at the gene level does not always give correct answers [17,18].…”
Section: Gene Quantificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By appropriately accounting for uncertainty in quantification, more accurate downstream differential analyses were obtained at both the gene and isoform levels. Sleuth [18] is a downstream analyses tool specifically developed for differential analyses at the transcript level. Figure 2: Minor isoform changes are masked at the gene level.…”
Section: Isoform Quantification Of Known Transcriptsmentioning
confidence: 99%