The Importance of including All Data in a Linear Model for the Analysis of RNAseq Data

Authors: Roxane A. Legaie, Kjiana E. Schwab, Caroline E. Gargett

Abstract:

Studies looking at the changes in gene expression from RNAseq data often make use of linear models. It is also common practice to focus on a subset of data for a comparison of interest, leaving aside the samples not involved in this particular comparison. This work shows the importance of including all observations in the modeling process to better estimate variance parameters, even when the samples included are not directly used in the comparison under test. The human endometrium is a dynamic tissue, which undergoes cycles of growth and regression with each menstrual cycle. The mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) present in the endometrium are likely responsible for this remarkable regenerative capacity. However recent studies suggest that MSCs also plays a role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis, one of the most common medical conditions affecting the lower abdomen in women in which the endometrial tissue grows outside the womb. In this study we compared gene expression profiles between MSCs and non-stem cell counterparts (‘non-MSC’) obtained from women with (‘E’) or without (‘noE’) endometriosis from RNAseq. Raw read counts were used for differential expression analysis using a linear model with the limma-voom R package, including either all samples in the study or only the samples belonging to the subset of interest (e.g. for the comparison ‘E vs noE in MSC cells’, including only MSC samples from E and noE patients but not the non-MSC ones). Using the full dataset we identified about 100 differentially expressed (DE) genes between E and noE samples in MSC samples (adj.p-val < 0.05 and |logFC|>1) while only 9 DE genes were identified when using only the subset of data (MSC samples only). Important genes known to be involved in endometriosis such as KLF9 and RND3 were missed in the latter case. When looking at the MSC vs non-MSC cells comparison, the linear model including all samples identified 260 genes for noE samples (including the stem cell marker SUSD2) while the subset analysis did not identify any DE genes. When looking at E samples, 12 genes were identified with the first approach and only 1 with the subset approach. Although the stem cell marker RGS5 was found in both cases, the subset test missed important genes involved in stem cell differentiation such as NOTCH3 and other potentially related genes to be used for further investigation and pathway analysis.

Keywords: differential expression, endometriosis, linear model, RNAseq