[Bioc-devel] A geneSet data class for facilitating GSEA
sdavis2 at mail.nih.gov
Wed Mar 14 18:24:29 CET 2007
On Wednesday 14 March 2007 12:59, Seth Falcon wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Sean Davis wrote:
> >> GSEA, both the specific method and the general concept, is becoming
> >> more prevalent and important in data analysis. There have been
> >> several mentions of including various "gene lists" for use with
> >> Category or other methods. Is there interest in making a generic
> >> geneSet class for storing such information? (Or does it already
> >> exist
> I also think this is a good idea and is something we (BioC Seattle
> group) are wiling to help with.
> It looks like the class defined in the soon-to-be-in-devel PGSEA
> package is very close to what is wanted. Having had a brief look at
> PGSEA it looks like a delimited format is defined for reading/writing
> gene set objects.
> Since the gene sets on the Broad's website__ already provide a simple
> XML format, I think it would be nice to be able to read and write that
> format. And we should make sure we have corresponding slots for the
> fields they use:
> Standard name # name of set
> LSID # ID of set
> Brief description
> Collection # collection ID
> Full description or Abstract
> Publication URL
> External links
> Contributed by
> Source platform
> __ http://www.broad.mit.edu/gsea/msigdb/cards/chr16q24.html
> I think the collection ID makes a lot of sense since some gene sets
> are really sets of gene sets like GO and cytogenetic bands.
> One concern with this approach is that for sets of gene sets (again,
> GO or cytogenetic bands) we will have a fair amount of duplication.
> But I'm not sure it will be a problem.
I agree that these are all close. I was thinking of keeping the collections
as a separate higher-level data structure. However, an email off-list I got
suggested that a geneSet could be composed of a set of ID's OR another set of
geneSets. A collection would then be a set of geneSets that are related in
some way. The interpretation is straightforward--a geneSet becomes the union
of all unique IDs in the contained geneSets. So a maintainer could choose to
code chr16q as a combination of all the geneSets for the bands of 16q, or
simply make one large vector of IDs. Either would be work for downstream
processing. What is more problematic is an API for getting at individual
geneSets (I want 16q24, but how do I get there if I need to go through chr16
and 16q24) embedded in a higher-level set in such a setup.
I'm inclined to think that hierarchical geneSets might be too complicated to
want to deal with, but Seth and the Bioc folks would know best.
> I'm not sure yet whether ID-type specific subclasses will make things
> easier or not. I am certain that we will be able to add some smarts
> to how the annotation is dealt with to allow at least some basic
> translation between IDs such as Entrez and gene symbol.
I agree. The one point that Vince's email makes, though, is that it would be
necessary to standardize the nomenclature for the various gene ID types if
there is any hope of introducing "smarts" in dealing with translation. One
way is to subclass, but the other is to validate any idType slot with
> Perhaps we should start a wiki page to hammer out a class definition?
More information about the Bioc-devel