Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2601.04122

Tool Choice Matters: Evaluating edgeR vs. DESeq2 for Sensitivity, Robustness, and Cross-Study Performance

Mostafa Rezapour
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Differential gene expression (DGE) analysis is foundational to transcriptomic research, yet tool selection can substantially influence results. This study presents a comprehensive comparison of two widely used DGE tools, edgeR and DESeq2, using real and semi-simulated bulk RNA-Seq datasets spanning viral, bacterial, and fibrotic conditions. We evaluated tool performance across three key dimensions: (1) sensitivity to sample size and robustness to outliers; (2) classification performance of uniquely identified gene sets within the discovery dataset; and (3) generalizability of tool-specific gene sets across independent studies. First, both tools showed similar responses to simulated outliers, with Jaccard similarity between the DEG sets from perturbed and original (unperturbed) data decreasing as more outliers were added. Second, classification models trained on tool-specific genes showed that edgeR achieved higher F1 scores in 9 of 13 contrasts and more frequently reached perfect or near-perfect precision. Dolan-More performance profiles further indicated that edgeR maintained performance closer to optimal across a greater proportion of datasets. Third, in cross-study validation using four independent SARS-CoV-2 datasets, gene sets uniquely identified by edgeR yielded higher AUC, precision, and recall in classifying samples from held-out datasets. This pattern was consistent across folds, with some test cases achieving perfect separation using edgeR-specific genes. In contrast, DESeq2-specific genes showed lower and more variable performance across studies. Overall, our findings highlight that while DESeq2 may identify more DEGs even under stringent significance conditions, edgeR yields more robust and generalizable gene sets for downstream classification and cross-study replication, which underscores key trade-offs in tool selection for transcriptomic analyses.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.GN

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mostafa Rezapour. 2026-05-18. Tool Choice Matters: Evaluating edgeR vs. DESeq2 for Sensitivity, Robustness, and Cross-Study Performance. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353788

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Transcriptomic Models for Immunotherapy Response Prediction Show Limited Cross-cohort Generalisability

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed cancer therapy; yet substantial proportion of patients exhibit intrinsic or acquired resistance, making accurate pre-treatment response prediction a critical unmet need. Transcriptomics-based biomarkers derived from bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) offer a promising avenue for capturing tumour-immune interactions, yet the cross-cohort generalisability of existing prediction models remains unclear.We systematically benchmark nine state-of-the-art transcriptomic ICI response predictors, five bulk RNA-seq-based models (COMPASS, IRNet, NetBio, IKCScore, and TNBC-ICI) and four scRNA-seq-based models (PRECISE, DeepGeneX, Tres and scCURE), using publicly available independent datasets unseen during model development. Overall, predictive performance was modest: bulk RNA-seq models performed at or near chance level across most cohorts, while scRNA-seq models showed only marginal improvements. Pathway-level analyses revealed sparse and inconsistent biomarker signals across models. Although scRNA-seq-based predictors converged on immune-related programs such as allograft rejection, bulk RNA-seq-based models exhibited little reproducible overlap. PRECISE and NetBio identified the most coherent immune-related themes, whereas IRNet predominantly captured metabolic pathways weakly aligned with ICI biology. Together, these findings demonstrate the limited cross-cohort robustness and biological consistency of current transcriptomic ICI prediction models, underscoring the need for improved domain adaptation, standardised preprocessing, and biologically grounded model design.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

Large Language Model Agents for Evidence Based Genetic Disease Severity Classification

Disease severity classification for genetic conditions is subjective and labor-intensive, creating bottlenecks in genomic screening, where commercial panels vary widely in size and overlap. We developed an autonomous AI agent integrating Reasoning and Acting (ReAct) with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to classify 10,211 Human Phenotype Ontology terms. It uses American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)-endorsed severity guidelines and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) quality-of-life criteria to retrieve PubMed literature, generate interpretable reasoning chains, and independently verify claims. At the phenotype level, using expert-curated cohorts, the agent achieved 93.55% accuracy (MCC 0.9237) with 82.6% to 91.4% of claims supported by direct evidence or valid inferences. Gene-level severity was aggregated across 8,738 pairs, identifying 3,283 autosomal recessive pairs with severe or profound presentations. External validation showed 95.2% concordance with Mackenzie's Mission gene list. This system enables standardized panel design by providing reliable, automated classification supported by direct evidence.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

Harmonised benchmarking of foundation models for single-cell and spatial transcriptomics reveals context-dependent generalisation

Single-cell and spatial foundation models promise transferable biological representations, yet their generality remains largely untested across modalities, biological domains and analytical tasks. We benchmarked six representative models, Nicheformer, CellPLM, scGPT-spatial, GenePT, scELMo and Novae, using a harmonised framework spanning scRNA-seq, spatial transcriptomics and Perturb-seq. We evaluated zero-shot and continually pretrained clustering, supervised annotation, marker-gene concordance and perturbation prediction. Model performance was strongly conditional: expression-trained cell-level transformers best resolved many cell-identity tasks, spatial and graph-aware models better preserved tissue architecture, and language-derived gene embeddings were competitive for selected perturbation-response metrics. No model dominated across tasks, and rankings shifted with modality, preprocessing, tokenisation, biological prior, domain shift and metric choice. This benchmark provides practical guidance for model selection and argues that future models should be judged by biological generalisation, interpretability and perturbation-grounded validity, not by scale or leaderboard performance alone.

q-bio.GN↗