ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2023
A comprehensive assessment of cell type-specific differential expression methods in bulk data.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell-Type Deconvolution of Equine BALF RNA-Seq: A Critical Comparison with Matched Single-Cell Data.Genes · 2026Article
- Single-cell RNA-sequencing of circulating tumour cells: A practical guide to workflow and translational applications.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2025Review
- Novel insights into post-myocardial infarction cardiac remodeling through algorithmic detection of cell-type composition shifts.PLoS genetics · 2025Article
- A systematic evaluation of cell-type-specific differential methylation analysis in bulk tissue.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Single-cell transcriptomic atlas of the chicken cecum reveals cellular responses and state shifts during Eimeria tenella infection.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- cypress: an R/Bioconductor package for cell-type-specific differential expression analysis power assessment.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Transcriptome- and DNA methylation-based cell-type deconvolutions produce similar estimates of differential gene expression and differential methylation.BioData mining · 2024Article
- Heterogeneous pseudobulk simulation enables realistic benchmarking of cell-type deconvolution methods.Genome biology · 2024Article
- imply: improving cell-type deconvolution accuracy using personalized reference profiles.Genome medicine · 2024Article
- Multimodal joint deconvolution and integrative signature selection in proteomics.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Transcriptome- and DNA methylation-based cell-type deconvolutions produce similar estimates of differential gene expression and differential methylation.Research square · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accounting for cell type compositions has been very successful at analyzing high-throughput data from heterogeneous tissues. Differential gene expression analysis at cell type level is becoming increasingly popular, yielding biomarker discovery in a finer granularity within a particular cell type. Although several computational methods have been developed to identify cell type-specific differentially expressed genes (csDEG) from RNA-seq data, a systematic evaluation is yet to be performed. Here, we thoroughly benchmark six recently published methods: CellDMC, CARseq, TOAST, LRCDE, CeDAR and TCA, together with two classical methods, csSAM and DESeq2, for a comprehensive comparison. We aim to systematically evaluate the performance of popular csDEG detection methods and provide guidance to researchers. In simulation studies, we benchmark available methods under various scenarios of baseline expression levels, sample sizes, cell type compositions, expression level alterations, technical noises and biological dispersions. Real data analyses of three large datasets on inflammatory bowel disease, lung cancer and autism provide evaluation in both the gene level and the pathway level. We find that csDEG calling is strongly affected by effect size, baseline expression level and cell type compositions. Results imply that csDEG discovery is a challenging task itself, with room to improvements on handling low signal-to-noise ratio and low expression genes.
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.