ArticleBMC bioinformatics2014
Comparative evaluation of gene set analysis approaches for RNA-Seq data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Significant up-regulation of Toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling pathway in Epstein-Barr virus-associated gastric cancer.International journal of molecular epidemiology and genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Statistical Approach of Gene Set Analysis with Quantitative Trait Loci for Crop Gene Expression Studies.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Toward a gold standard for benchmarking gene set enrichment analysis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Data-driven detection of subtype-specific differentially expressed genes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Simultaneous Enrichment Analysis of all Possible Gene-sets: Unifying Self-Contained and Competitive Methods.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2020Review
- Fifteen Years of Gene Set Analysis for High-Throughput Genomic Data: A Review of Statistical Approaches and Future Challenges.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Article
- Probabilistic prioritization of candidate pathway association with pathway score.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Gene dispersion is the key determinant of the read count bias in differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data.BMC genomics · 2017Article
- GSAR: Bioconductor package for Gene Set analysis in R.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- Extracting the Strongest Signals from Omics Data: Differentially Expressed Pathways and Beyond.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2017Article
- Article
- Gene set analysis approaches for RNA-seq data: performance evaluation and application guideline.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2016Article
- htsint: a Python library for sequencing pipelines that combines data through gene set generation.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Effects of subsampling on characteristics of RNA-seq data from triple-negative breast cancer patients.Chinese journal of cancer · 2015Article
- Advanced Applications of RNA Sequencing and Challenges.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2015Review
- Data- and knowledge-based modeling of gene regulatory networks: an update.EXCLI journal · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver the last few years transcriptome sequencing (RNA-Seq) has almost completely taken over microarrays for high-throughput studies of gene expression. Currently, the most popular use of RNA-Seq is to identify genes which are differentially expressed between two or more conditions. Despite the importance of Gene Set Analysis (GSA) in the interpretation of the results from RNA-Seq experiments, the limitations of GSA methods developed for microarrays in the context of RNA-Seq data are not well understood.
resultsWe provide a thorough evaluation of popular multivariate and gene-level self-contained GSA approaches on simulated and real RNA-Seq data. The multivariate approach employs multivariate non-parametric tests combined with popular normalizations for RNA-Seq data. The gene-level approach utilizes univariate tests designed for the analysis of RNA-Seq data to find gene-specific P-values and combines them into a pathway P-value using classical statistical techniques. Our results demonstrate that the Type I error rate and the power of multivariate tests depend only on the test statistics and are insensitive to the different normalizations. In general standard multivariate GSA tests detect pathways that do not have any bias in terms of pathways size, percentage of differentially expressed genes, or average gene length in a pathway. In contrast the Type I error rate and the power of gene-level GSA tests are heavily affected by the methods for combining P-values, and all aforementioned biases are present in detected pathways.
conclusionsOur result emphasizes the importance of using self-contained non-parametric multivariate tests for detecting differentially expressed pathways for RNA-Seq data and warns against applying gene-level GSA tests, especially because of their high level of Type I error rates for both, simulated and real data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.