Ranking the GSEA Results
1
0
Entering edit mode
V_Vibes • 0
@4aa9b7a6
Last seen 5 months ago
India

I have a query regarding the analysis of GSEA Results. For GSEA, I have used "fgsea" R package to obtain the dysregulated KEGG pathways. Now, I want to rank the dysregulated KEGG pathways.

I have seen people ranking the dysregulated genes on the basis of log2Fold Change and p-value obtained from DESeq2. For genes, they use the decreasing order of log2FC * (-log10 p-value) to rank the genes.

So, is it logical to use NES * (- log10 Nominal p-value) for ranking the KEGG pathways?

Edit: The idea was inspired by people ranking the DEGs for preranked GSEA using their log2FC * (-log10 p-value). Also, the GSEA results I am getting, don't have any pathway with adjusted p-value <0.25. So, I can't rank the results by absolute NES after taking cutoff by p-adjusted value.
fgsea log2FC • 1.2k views
ADD COMMENT •
1
Entering edit mode

Where did you see ranking of genes by log2FC * (-log10 p-value)? I don't think I ever saw one and not sure what it should achieve. Aren't you confusing it with ranking by sign(log2FC) * (-log10 p-value)?

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

I found the suggestion of using log2FC * (-log10 p-value) here.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

You can rank the output of GSEA by the NES there is no need to use the p-value for ranking. Why do you think it is needed?

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

The idea was inspired by people ranking the DEGs for preranked GSEA using their log2FC * (-log10 p-value). Also, the GSEA results I am getting, don't have any pathway with adjusted p-value <0.25. So, I can't rank the results by absolute NES after taking cutoff by p-adjusted value.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

You can have the ranking without the cutoff. If you don't keep any gene set after the cutoff then there is nothing to rank as you said, so using log10(p-value) won't solve your problem.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

There GSEA has been run on 3 sets of samples. For 2 of them, GSEA results in statistically significant KEGG pathways with adjusted p-value <0.25 while not for the 3rd set.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

Then you meant to ask a different question? Each time we try to help we are getting answers that points us to a different direction. We cannot help you this way without spending quite a lot of time. Please provide the minimal necessary context and code to help you. Good luck!

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode
@mikelove
Last seen 2 hours ago
United States

Some posts on this topic:

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Asupport.bioconductor.org+GSEA+ranking+DESeq2
ADD COMMENT •
0
Entering edit mode

Thanks for replying. On searching on the web, I am finding the results answering how to rank the genes for using GSEA. However, I want to rank the GSEA results.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

Sorry I missed that when replying.

GSEA is not a Bioconductor package right? So the developers aren't here to provide their recommendation. This support site is generally reserved for Bioconductor package help.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

I have actually used the "fgsea" Bioconductor package which is used for GSEA. Thanks for pointing that out. I have edited that in the original post.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

Got it. So then I'll take off DESeq2 as its mostly a downstream question. You may need to direct the fgsea developer to the thread. When you post originally it sends an email to the developer (hence I came here) but i don't think it does this when you change tags.

ADD REPLY •
0
Entering edit mode

Apparently, it sends a notification to the developer on a new message after the tags were updated :) but not the change of tags itself

ADD REPLY •

Login before adding your answer.

Similar Posts
Loading Similar Posts
Traffic: 754 users visited in the last hour
Content Search
Users
Tags
Badges
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6