You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, first thanks for developing such a awesome tool! I want to use Nichnetr to analyze my scRNA data from liver cancer, and I'm following the HNSCC guide.
In their initial paper, there is significant inter-patient heterogeneity (or to say, batch effect) in the malignant cells, but in this tutorial it does not take this into consideration. It only requires a gene is "expressed", but ignores which patient it comes from. So after the estimation of ligand activity (without considering the patient origin of cells), it's likely that a CAF ligand with "high activity" is expressed in patient 01, 03, but the p-EMT genes are mostly expressed in patient 02, 04. And such result could be misleading because interaction cannot cross different patients.
I wonder if there is some step I wrongly understand, if not, do you have some advice on dealing with such situation (inter-tumor or inter patient heterogeneity)? Any suggestion will be appreciated.
Thanks!
Yang
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
You are right about this (but note that this is just an example to show how to perform a NicheNet analysis). To deal with inter patient heterogeneity, I would suggest doing a NicheNet analysis per tumor/patient. If you then want to draw general conclusions, you could look for correspondences between the results for the different tumors/patients.
Hi, first thanks for developing such a awesome tool! I want to use Nichnetr to analyze my scRNA data from liver cancer, and I'm following the HNSCC guide.
In their initial paper, there is significant inter-patient heterogeneity (or to say, batch effect) in the malignant cells, but in this tutorial it does not take this into consideration. It only requires a gene is "expressed", but ignores which patient it comes from. So after the estimation of ligand activity (without considering the patient origin of cells), it's likely that a CAF ligand with "high activity" is expressed in patient 01, 03, but the p-EMT genes are mostly expressed in patient 02, 04. And such result could be misleading because interaction cannot cross different patients.
I wonder if there is some step I wrongly understand, if not, do you have some advice on dealing with such situation (inter-tumor or inter patient heterogeneity)? Any suggestion will be appreciated.
Thanks!
Yang
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: