Overlooked poor-quality patient samples in sequencing data impair reproducibility of published clinically relevant datasets

IF 10.1 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Maximilian Sprang, Jannik Möllmann, Miguel A. Andrade-Navarro, Jean-Fred Fontaine
{"title":"Overlooked poor-quality patient samples in sequencing data impair reproducibility of published clinically relevant datasets","authors":"Maximilian Sprang, Jannik Möllmann, Miguel A. Andrade-Navarro, Jean-Fred Fontaine","doi":"10.1186/s13059-024-03331-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reproducibility is a major concern in biomedical studies, and existing publication guidelines do not solve the problem. Batch effects and quality imbalances between groups of biological samples are major factors hampering reproducibility. Yet, the latter is rarely considered in the scientific literature. Our analysis uses 40 clinically relevant RNA-seq datasets to quantify the impact of quality imbalance between groups of samples on the reproducibility of gene expression studies. High-quality imbalance is frequent (14 datasets; 35%), and hundreds of quality markers are present in more than 50% of the datasets. Enrichment analysis suggests common stress-driven effects among the low-quality samples and highlights a complementary role of transcription factors and miRNAs to regulate stress response. Preliminary ChIP-seq results show similar trends. Quality imbalance has an impact on the number of differential genes derived by comparing control to disease samples (the higher the imbalance, the higher the number of genes), on the proportion of quality markers in top differential genes (the higher the imbalance, the higher the proportion; up to 22%) and on the proportion of known disease genes in top differential genes (the higher the imbalance, the lower the proportion). We show that removing outliers based on their quality score improves the resulting downstream analysis. Thanks to a stringent selection of well-designed datasets, we demonstrate that quality imbalance between groups of samples can significantly reduce the relevance of differential genes, consequently reducing reproducibility between studies. Appropriate experimental design and analysis methods can substantially reduce the problem.","PeriodicalId":12611,"journal":{"name":"Genome Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genome Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-024-03331-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reproducibility is a major concern in biomedical studies, and existing publication guidelines do not solve the problem. Batch effects and quality imbalances between groups of biological samples are major factors hampering reproducibility. Yet, the latter is rarely considered in the scientific literature. Our analysis uses 40 clinically relevant RNA-seq datasets to quantify the impact of quality imbalance between groups of samples on the reproducibility of gene expression studies. High-quality imbalance is frequent (14 datasets; 35%), and hundreds of quality markers are present in more than 50% of the datasets. Enrichment analysis suggests common stress-driven effects among the low-quality samples and highlights a complementary role of transcription factors and miRNAs to regulate stress response. Preliminary ChIP-seq results show similar trends. Quality imbalance has an impact on the number of differential genes derived by comparing control to disease samples (the higher the imbalance, the higher the number of genes), on the proportion of quality markers in top differential genes (the higher the imbalance, the higher the proportion; up to 22%) and on the proportion of known disease genes in top differential genes (the higher the imbalance, the lower the proportion). We show that removing outliers based on their quality score improves the resulting downstream analysis. Thanks to a stringent selection of well-designed datasets, we demonstrate that quality imbalance between groups of samples can significantly reduce the relevance of differential genes, consequently reducing reproducibility between studies. Appropriate experimental design and analysis methods can substantially reduce the problem.
测序数据中被忽视的劣质患者样本损害了已发布的临床相关数据集的可重复性
可重复性是生物医学研究中的一个主要问题,而现有的发表指南并不能解决这个问题。生物样本组之间的批次效应和质量不平衡是影响可重复性的主要因素。然而,科学文献很少考虑后者。我们的分析使用了 40 个临床相关的 RNA-seq 数据集,以量化样本组间质量不平衡对基因表达研究可重复性的影响。高质量不平衡现象很常见(14 个数据集,占 35%),50% 以上的数据集中存在数百个质量标记。富集分析表明,在低质量样本中存在共同的应激驱动效应,并强调了转录因子和 miRNA 在调节应激反应中的互补作用。初步的 ChIP-seq 结果显示了类似的趋势。质量不平衡会影响通过比较对照样本和疾病样本得出的差异基因数量(不平衡越高,基因数量越多)、顶级差异基因中质量标记物的比例(不平衡越高,比例越高;最高达 22%)以及顶级差异基因中已知疾病基因的比例(不平衡越高,比例越低)。我们的研究表明,根据异常值的质量得分剔除异常值可以改善下游分析结果。由于严格选择了设计良好的数据集,我们证明样本组之间的质量不平衡会显著降低差异基因的相关性,从而降低研究之间的可重复性。适当的实验设计和分析方法可以大大减少这一问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Genome Biology
Genome Biology Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
21.00
自引率
3.30%
发文量
241
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Genome Biology stands as a premier platform for exceptional research across all domains of biology and biomedicine, explored through a genomic and post-genomic lens. With an impressive impact factor of 12.3 (2022),* the journal secures its position as the 3rd-ranked research journal in the Genetics and Heredity category and the 2nd-ranked research journal in the Biotechnology and Applied Microbiology category by Thomson Reuters. Notably, Genome Biology holds the distinction of being the highest-ranked open-access journal in this category. Our dedicated team of highly trained in-house Editors collaborates closely with our esteemed Editorial Board of international experts, ensuring the journal remains on the forefront of scientific advances and community standards. Regular engagement with researchers at conferences and institute visits underscores our commitment to staying abreast of the latest developments in the field.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信