Cited by 617Gene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics

Removing technical variability in RNA-seq data using conditional quantile normalization

Open access
Hansen, K. D., Irizarry, R. A., WU, Z.·2012·Biostatistics

Abstract

The ability to measure gene expression on a genome-wide scale is one of the most promising accomplishments in molecular biology. Microarrays, the technology that first permitted this, were riddled with problems due to unwanted sources of variability. Many of these problems are now mitigated, after a decade's worth of statistical methodology development. The recently developed RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) technology has generated much excitement in part due to claims of reduced variability in comparison to microarrays. However, we show that RNA-seq data demonstrate unwanted and obscuring variability similar to what was first observed in microarrays. In particular, we find guanine-cytosine content (GC-content) has a strong sample-specific effect on gene expression measurements that, if left uncorrected, leads to false positives in downstream results. We also report on commonly observed data distortions that demonstrate the need for data normalization. Here, we describe a statistical methodology that improves precision by 42% without loss of accuracy. Our resulting conditional quantile normalization algorithm combines robust generalized regression to remove systematic bias introduced by deterministic features such as GC-content and quantile normalization to correct for global distortions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biostatistics/kxr054

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Conditional quantile normalization using the cqn Bioconductor package was applied to the RNAseq data, to reduce variability introduced by GC content, gene size and total gene counts per sample.

    “Conditional quantile normalization using the cqn Bioconductor package48 was applied to the RNAseq data, to reduce variability introduced by GC content, gene size and total gene counts per sample.”

    From Cellular senescence mediates fibrotic pulmonary disease (2017) · cites this paper as [48]

  • In large-scale RNA-seq studies, commonly used normalization methods (cqn, EDASeq, RUV2, sva, PEER) differ in how well they remove systematic biases, depending on sample complexity and initial data quality.

    “commonly used methods fornormalization (cqn, EDASeq, RUV2, sva, PEER) varied in their ability to remove these systematic biases, depending on sample complexity and initial data quality.”
  • Applying GC bias correction tools (cqn, EDASeq) to individual sites or restricting read counts to 3′-UTRs did not reduce inter-site false positive DEGs and often increased them.

    “Notably, neither applying GC bias correction tools (cqn14 and EDASeq15) to individual sites nor changing read counts to only use 3′-UTRs was effective at decreasing the number of inter-site false positive DEGs (Fig. 1b and Supplementary Fig. 3); in most cases, these methods actually increased the number of false positives.”
  • GC content bias correction packages cqn and EDASeq could not remove the false positives, likely because GC content bias is not the only source of bias in gene expression data.

    “The application of GC content bias correction packages including cqn14 and EDASeq15 could not remove these false positives, likely because GC content bias is not the only source that contributes to bias in gene expression data.”
  • Autism is characterized by extreme phenotypic heterogeneity and involvement of hundreds of loci.

    “This slow progress can be attributed, in part, to both the extreme phenotypic heterogeneity and involvement of hundreds of loci in the disorder45.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Flicek P Amode MR Barrell D Beal K Brent S Chen Y Clapham P Coates G Fairley S Fitzgerald S and others Ensembl 2011. Nucleic Acids Research 39 Suppl 2011 1) D800 PMC3013672 21045057
  2. Koenker R Quantile Regression 2005 New York Cambridge University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hansen, K. D., Irizarry, R. A., & WU, Z.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
WU, Z.
Venue
Biostatistics
Published
2012-01-27
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
204-216
ISSN
  • 1465-4644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4357
OpenAlex
W2170219300
Cited by
607
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 21
FWCI
14.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Biostatistics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Collection of Biostatistics Research Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1054905)
  • University of Memphis
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG004059, R01HG005220)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Keywords
RNA-seq, gene expression normalization, GC content bias, technical variability, false positives, quantile normalization, microarray comparison, data distortion
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Analysis of Variance, Base Composition, Humans, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Databases, Nucleic Acid, Biostatistics, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review